2018-06-13

Adjournment Proceedings
[Stage Direction]
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved. 
Mrs. Stephanie Kusie (Calgary Midnapore, CPC): Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister's trip to India was billed as an opportunity to foster relations between India and Canada, but that opportunity was squandered when the Liberals caused a diplomatic incident and embarrassed our country on the global stage. It was shocking enough to learn that a convicted attempted murderer had attended official events. Unfortunately, that was not the only revelation to come out regarding the India trip.
 As part of the Liberal delegation, the member for Brampton East made sure that his business associate, a construction CEO, got access to high level ministers, including the Prime Minister himself. The member receives income from this company and therefore stands to personally profit from any increased business that the company receives as a result of his participation in the India trip.
The Liberals have responded to these allegations by talking about the importance of creating ties between Canadian and Indian business and community leaders. We can all agree on the importance of increasing trade and helping our businesses prosper, but that is not the issue at stake here.
 The issue is that all Canadian businesses should have equal access to these events and opportunities. Those with ties to Liberal MPs should not have an unfair advantage and MPs should never use their position to further their private interests. When this happens, it undermines the faith that Canadians have put in all of us as Parliamentarians.
This behaviour also flies in the face of the ethics code that each and every MP agrees to when he or she is elected to the House of Commons.
 I took the step of sending a letter to the Ethics Commissioner to request that he conduct a formal investigation into the matter. I have received a response, stating that the incident does merit him taking steps toward an investigation. I am pleased that we will have answers about this incident and that the member from Brampton East will be held accountable for any wrongdoing on his part.
 Everyone who is elected to the House of Commons to represent Canadians must be held to the highest ethical standards. My Conservative colleagues and I will continue to work hard to hold the Liberal government accountable for its bad behaviour. 
What is the Liberal government doing to ensure its members follow basic ethical rules?
Hon. Andrew Leslie (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Canada-U.S. Relations), Lib.): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the question of my hon. colleague vis-à-vis trade with India and the very unfortunate increase of up to 50% on specific commodities. In this case, I would like to focus our attention on peas and lentils.
This is a priority for our government. Canadian agricultural exports to India have been increasing over the past decade, which is fantastic news, from around half a billion dollars to trade in excess of $1 billion in 2016 and 2017. I would like to start by emphasizing that we are extremely disappointed and concerned with the measures put in place by the Government of India. In that context, I share my colleague's concerns.
These measures by India lack transparency and have created an unpredictable trade environment. Over the past few months, India has used several different types of measures that have negatively impacted Canada and the global pulse market.
The first relates to the fumigation requirement. Since 2004, Canada has been receiving a series of country-specific exemptions, called derogations, from India's requirement that pulses be fumigated prior to leaving Canada. Canada's position is that we can effectively meet India's plant health concerns without the need for fumigation. However, for the first time, on October 1, 2017, our country-specific derogation was not renewed. Trade with India can continue through a general derogation, which allows for agricultural products to be fumigated upon arrival, which of course is more expensive and time-consuming. The penalty for not meeting the fumigation requirements is cost-prohibitive and significantly impacts the competitiveness of our pulse sector in India. This general exemption expires on June 30, 2018.
The second measure is an increase in import duties. Since November 8, 2017, India has increased duties on dry peas to 50%, as referred to by my hon. colleague, lentils to 33%, and chickpeas to 66%. India's tariff increases are usually given without notice and are applied immediately to all shipments, including those in transit at the time of the increase.
The third measure was put in place on April 25, 2018. It is a limit on the volume of imports for pea shipments. This is not a ban on pea imports, but a limit of 100,000 tonnes allowed during a three-month period, which is applied to all countries.
These measures are designed to limit trade of foreign pulses to India and have created a lack of predictability and transparency in the global pulse market. They reflect an attempt by India to address domestic challenges, which include a bumper crop of pulses in 2017-18.
We have a deep concern with these measures, and we are taking a number of actions. Through high-level engagement, the government has expressed deep concern and disappointment with India's very restrictive policies. We take the commitment to resolve this issue seriously, and we will work with our Indian counterparts to ensure that they do the same. Of course, we have done an enormous amount of technical work to demonstrate that we have a rigorous inspection process that ensures that India's plant health concerns are met. We have also invited Indian officials to Canada in the coming months to review our grain handling system and to see for themselves that fumigation is not necessary.
On the issue of duties, although India is within its World Trade Organization rights to increase duties within certain constraints, Canada is concerned that no notification was given before implementation, and of course this impedes the free exchange of goods.
On the issue of limiting the volume of imports for pea shipments, we are reviewing whether India's—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The hon. member for Calgary Midnapore.
Stephanie Kusie: Madam Speaker, the Conservative government of Canada prided itself on a principles-based approach that encouraged democracy and justice abroad in addition to expanding the Canadian economy and increasing foreign investment. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister's trip to India was more about photo ops than about the economy.
It is disheartening that a member of the Liberal delegation seems to have used his position to help a business associate gain privileged access to ministers. If this trip was truly about the economy, all businesses should have had equal access to these opportunities. It is unacceptable that those who have a connection to the Liberal Party have privileged access over those who do not, and this speaks to the Liberals' objectives abroad.
Andrew Leslie: Madam Speaker, I would like to close by underlining the fact that, while there will always be challenges with regard to trade, Canada's agriculture and agri-food sector is set for strong growth well into the future.
Our government knows that trade drives our jobs and our economy. That is why we have set a target of $75 billion in agricultural exports by 2025. Last year, we hit a new record of $64.6 billion in agriculture and food exports, which is an increase of $2 billion from 2016. Our government is building on that success with the signing of the CPTPP and the coming into force of CETA, which could boost our agricultural products by another $2.5 billion.
Through budget 2018, we have invested $75 million to boost our trading presence in China and other key markets for Canadian farmers. Diversification is the key. Our government will continue to ensure that we help Canadian farmers and agribusinesses take advantage of new export opportunities.
I agree with the hon. colleague that the current conduct of India vis-à-vis trade, specifically pulses and chickpeas, is unacceptable.
InfrastructureMs. Brigitte Sansoucy (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, NDP): Madam Speaker, in March, I rose in the House to call on the government to present us its plan for spending billions of dollars on infrastructure over the next 12 years, a plan that the municipalities are still waiting for.
The Minister of Infrastructure and Communities told me that nearly $180 billion would be released in order to build the necessary infrastructure that Mr. Harper's Conservative government had neglected for 10 years. That is all well and good, but as the Parliamentary Budget Officer pointed out, it would be nice if the Liberal government established a real plan for spending all that money and building the high-quality infrastructure that our constituents expect.
I would like to share with my colleagues my deep concern about the government's lack of transparency and organization in managing our infrastructure. In response to my most recent question on the Order Paper, I was told that the plan to invest in Canada consisted of a number of programs and initiatives implemented by 14 departments. The programs target different types of infrastructure, and therefore there is no funding criteria standard. Wow.
The federal government is not tracking the requests received or the scheduled payment dates for any of the programs. I do not see how the so-called plan is being managed.
The NDP believes that our country needs public investment right now to ensure that our roads, airports, and public transit systems meet Canadians' needs.
Our public infrastructure is the cornerstone of our country. That is why we must ensure that the $180 billion invested over the next 10 years will benefit all Canadians and our municipal and provincial partners. I also want to draw the Liberal government's attention to small municipalities, which, in my opinion, deserve more attention from Ottawa.
As a former municipal councillor with the City of Saint-Hyacinthe, I am convinced that the realities and needs of small municipalities are quite different from those of big cities. I truly believe that the the federal government should consider their specific needs and realities when making decisions about infrastructure.
I have sat on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure, and Communities several times. I listened to witnesses who explained how a lack of financial resources can sometimes prevent small municipalities from submitting projects that their communities need.
For example, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities said that the traditional process is onerous for small communities. Other witnesses said that some very small municipalities are understaffed and do not have an up-to-date inventory of their infrastructure funding needs.
The NDP therefore believes that it is imperative that the federal government establish means and mechanisms to further support these small municipalities so that they can identify their own needs for infrastructure funding. We believe that it is the federal government's duty to be more flexible and to make the process less onerous for small municipalities that need the government to take their realities and unique characteristics into account.
I also believe that we should expect a lot from a government that often describes itself as progressive and says it is concerned about climate change.
Mr. Marc Miller (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I would like to highlight that, as has been said before, we have a comprehensive infrastructure plan that is delivering to Canada for Canadians. These projects are creating economic growth as noted by the Bank of Canada, and opportunities for Canadians as we build healthy, livable, and sustainable communities. Our infrastructure plan was presented in budget 2016, and we expanded that in the year's fall economic statement and the funding was profiled, as members may recall, in budget 2017.
The government's investing in Canada plan is made up of three important elements: $92 billion in renewed programs, $14.4 billion in investments in projects that make much-needed repairs to existing infrastructure, and $81.2 billion to support infrastructure investment in five priority areas over the next decade. They are notably public transit infrastructure, green infrastructure, social infrastructure, trade and transportation infrastructure, and infrastructure in rural and northern communities, which is particularly responsive to the member's question, especially as it represented a change in what we had planned to do, notably through advocacy of rural members. I would encourage the member opposite to take note of that, and even more so as the federal government's share increased a larger percentage in the last bilateral agreements that we have been negotiating with provinces, which will alleviate the burden on smaller communities.
I want to focus on the new investments made by our government.
In budget 2016, we launched the phase one of our $180-billion investing in Canada plan. Phase one supports a wide variety of infrastructure projects, including public transit, water, waste water, and affordable housing projects in communities across Canada, including indigenous communities.
Since then, the Government of Canada has approved over 29,000 projects for a total estimated value of $13.2 billion in federal funding.
We are also making considerable progress on our commitments made under budget 2017. Under the second phase of our plan, 11 federal departments, as the member opposite highlighted, are delivering 24 programs and nearly all have launched. 
We are committed to transparency and, as highlighted in budget 2018, we have reprofiled funding over the years of our plan. This is an issue of cash flow management and not one of lack of activity, as the members opposite might suggest, which is entirely erroneous. The funding in our investing in Canada plan remains available. If funding does not flow in a given year, it is reprofiled to future years, ensuring that the federal funding remains available to project partners when they need it.
We remain committed to working openly and transparently as we develop programs that will provide necessary funding for infrastructure Canadians need and use every day.
Our government understands that infrastructure is the foundation of building a strong economy, creating jobs for the middle class and creating opportunity for those who work hard each and every day to be part of the middle class. These investments we have made to date demonstrate our commitment to Canadians, and we look forward to building even stronger, more sustainable, and inclusive communities for the 21st century.
Brigitte Sansoucy: Madam Speaker, it is the government's responsibility to ensure that our public infrastructure can adapt to the reality of tomorrow and the effects of climate change. 
The NDP believes the government must consider the possibility of implementing a protocol like the one proposed by Engineers Canada to assess infrastructure climate risk and vulnerability and recommend ways to adapt to extreme weather events and future climate conditions.
The government must enable small municipalities to access this protocol so they can build lasting public infrastructure. The NDP believes that Canadians should be able to count on infrastructure funding for viable, long-lasting infrastructure that can stand up to the challenges of climate change.
Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, I would like to respond directly to the question by stating that we have put several billion dollars in focusing precisely on what the member opposite has discussed, which is climate change and making sure we are building infrastructure that is responsive and resistant to climate change, which we know is occurring, which we know is made by humanity, and which we know we need to adapt to for the 21st century.
We rely on the expertise of our local partners, who decide which projects will help them grow the economy, build inclusive communities, and support a green, low-carbon economy.
We are proud to provide federal funding to achieve those objectives. During phase one of our plan, as I said in the first half of my presentation, the federal government approved over 29,000 projects for a total estimated value of $13.2 billion in federal funding. That does not include funding awarded to communities, provinces, and municipalities, among others. The vast majority of these projects are under way.
International TradeMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): Madam Speaker, I rise this morning now seeking answers to a question I originally raised in March about the then impending steel and aluminum tariffs on U.S. imports. Clearly those tariffs have become a very real and difficult reality for the manufacturers and workers in those sectors in Canada today.
At that time, more than three months ago, the NDP was calling for the Prime Minister to take immediate action to protect the more than 146,000 good-paying jobs. The New Democrats demanded immediate action by the government to get a permanent exemption to this unfair tax from the Trump administration.
Canadians know that these tariffs have been imposed upon us unfairly. They know that Donald Trump has used the U.S. section 232 investigation and the justification of protecting national security as an excuse to impose these tariffs. Canada has always been America's closest ally and partner in trade and in defence. 
Canadians also know that President Trump has his own divergent agenda. In fact, after the actions that he and members of his administration took against Canada this past weekend, I was prompted to stand in the House yesterday and ask for unanimous consent to show solidarity and a united front against Trump's divisive bullying tactics.
That is why my motion called for all members of this place to also stand in solidarity with workers, farmers and manufacturers. My motion was one step. The retaliatory tariffs imposed by the Government of Canada against the U.S. are just another step.
I want to know, in these early hours, answers to multiple questions, questions that Canadians are asking themselves today. 
How will the Government of Canada, in light of the uncertainty of trade relations with the U.S. and the NAFTA renegotiations, protect our industries and thousands of Canadian workers who are greatly concerned for their jobs?
Rather than taking defensive and proactive action immediately, the Liberal government will not impose the retaliatory tariffs until July 1. Why has the government not acted more swiftly, like Mexico or the EU? 
How will the Liberal government continue to work to secure a permanent exemption?
 How has the government prepared for a contingency of the offshore of diversion of steel to the Canadian market?
 What will the government specifically do to support workers? Will it make some more offers as it did for softwood lumber? Will it extend the duration and coverage of employment insurance and provide retraining packages?
 Ultimately, will the Liberals keep their promise to allow trade unions the right to file complaints under the Special Imports Measures Act?
These are all questions that Canadians today are asking of the government. I am proud to stand here and ask them on behalf of the NDP.
I would like to read part of a press release that was released today, June 12, by the United Steelworkers. It urges the government to act swiftly to impose the retaliatory tariffs. It says that it “joins...the country's steel producers in expressing concern that the counter-measures should be implemented as soon as possible.” We see both labour and steel producers united in this call. 
The USW says, “Canada should not wait until July 1 to respond to the unjustified U.S. tariffs.” The USW represents thousands of steel and aluminum workers across the country.
This is a submission on the Canadian counter measures to U.S. tariffs. It is signed by Ken Neumann, who is the Canadian USW national director.
Last, I would like to read a quote from him. He says, “Canada’s steelworkers need support similar to what was afforded to Quebec’s aluminum workers and Canada’s forestry workers. The government of Quebec has offered $100 million in loan guarantees to support the aluminum industry based in that Province. Canadian steel communities are already hurting...”
 What will the government do to help?
Andrew Leslie: Madam Speaker, I am delighted to be here at 25 minutes after midnight.
Over the past several days, we have seen members of this House united in denouncing the recently announced U.S. section 232 tariffs, and united in supporting our government's strong stance in responding to these tariffs. I want to thank the member opposite for her particular work on this issue, and for the unanimous consent motion that so clearly demonstrated our united front in this very important regard.
These unilateral tariffs imposed by the United States under the pretext of national security are unacceptable and an affront to the long-standing security partnership between the United States and Canada, and Canada has no choice but to respond. Indeed, Canada is imposing reciprocal and proportional tariffs against U.S. imports worth $16.6 billion, equivalent to the value of Canadian exports hit by U.S. tariffs. They were very carefully chosen and very carefully applied.
These tariffs will be implemented following the 15-day consultation period, on July 1, Canada Day, which allows Canadians to express their views on the proposed countermeasures in this intervening period of time. This period is important to ensure that we have the best possible retaliatory list. Therefore, we need ideas from Canadians. We need their input and advice over the next couple of days to make sure that the targets have been adequately and carefully selected.
Our tariffs will also be coordinated with those of the European Union. We have also launched dispute settlement cases under NAFTA chapter 20 and World Trade Organization rules to challenge these tariffs. Simply put, we are taking every action to defend Canadian workers and industry.
 Canada and the U.S. have been close allies in NATO and NORAD for years, and we are even recognized in U.S. law as part of the American military industrial base, contributing to the united security of the continent. As a former soldier who has fought alongside our American friends, and in my case, literally family, I submit that using national security concerns to impose such tariffs on Canadian products makes no sense. 
 U.S. duties on steel and aluminum harm U.S. and Canadian workers both, because our economies are so highly integrated. Of course, these tariffs imposed by the Americans cannot go unanswered. The Prime Minister has been clear. Canada's response will be proportional, measured, and reciprocal. 
On NAFTA, Canada remains prepared to engage in a good-faith negotiation towards a modernized agreement. Indeed, the Minister of Foreign Affairs leaves early this morning to go back down to Washington. In order for discussions to move forward, there will need to be a shared commitment to rules-based trade, improving North American competitiveness, and achieving an outcome that brings benefits to both our countries. 
 Our approach and our positions in these negotiations have been consistent since the beginning. We will continue to vigorously defend Canadian interests and values. As the Prime Minister has said directly to steel and aluminum workers, we are united in this great House and we have their backs.
Tracey Ramsey: Madam Speaker, the uncertainty of trade relations with the U.S. is already having a serious affect on our industries, and thousands of Canadian workers are greatly concerned for their jobs. Absent proactive action, the Liberal government is letting Canadians endure one round of punitive trade tariffs after the next, which threatens significant job losses for Canadians.
 The Liberal government must secure a permanent exemption, but it also must be fully prepared if the permanent exemption is not secured. This includes preparing for the contingency of offshore diversion of steel to the Canadian market and extending the duration and coverage of employment insurance.
New Democrats urge the government to address the very real problem of cheap imports directly or indirectly entering the North American market, including increasing resources to the CBSA to investigate and respond to the increased dumping of products. Canada cannot become a dumping ground for foreign steel.
I hope the Liberal government will take these actions seriously and act urgently.
Andrew Leslie: Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for the excellent points she just raised. 
We will always protect workers in the steel and aluminum industries. For example, in March and April, the Prime Minister announced a new set of measures to address potential steel and aluminum diversions or dumping into Canada stemming from U.S. tariffs on certain countries. To that effect, we have a record of up to 72 trade remedies, as they are called, which are instruments that are required to circumvent and prevent just that sort of behaviour by international steel producers. 
These measures will allow, as well, the Canada Border Services Agency to better address the issue of circumvention and to stop foreign companies that are trying to dodge duties. To that extent, we have invested an additional $30 million in additional human and other resources to better investigate, supervise, and constrain. These measures will help protect Canadian industries and also demonstrate our willingness to fight unfair trade practices. 
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until later this day at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 12:29 a.m.)
The Speaker: It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Edmonton Centre.
[Members sang the national anthem]
Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ): Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Minister of Health announced her decision to fight the Senate amendments to the cannabis legalization bill. The Government of Canada is rejecting the amendment confirming Quebec's power to prohibit home cannabis cultivation. 
One would think the federal government would have shown a modicum of respect. According to Jean-Marc Fournier, the Attorney General of Quebec, this is a bitter disappointment. I agree.
Today, the Government of Canada is once again sending the message that it could not care less about Quebec. Once again, the 40 curiously silent Liberal members and the Prime Minister are disrespecting Quebec. Once again, the Liberals are being inflexible. Once again, they are giving us a reason to seek independence. 
This is an insult to Quebec. It is unacceptable to the Bloc Québécois—
The Speaker: Order. The hon. member for Brampton West.
Mount Pleasant Village MarketMs. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, summer is just around the corner, and in Brampton West that means it is time for the Mount Pleasant Village Market.
This farmers' market is now in its fourth year and is an opportunity for our community to come together to support local producers, vendors, and budding small businesses. I had the opportunity to visit the market in its first year, and the amount it has grown since then is remarkable.
The farmers' market will run in Mount Pleasant Square every Thursday from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. throughout the summer, starting June 21, until October 4. I am sure there will be many delicious, locally sourced options at the market to help families in Brampton West make healthier choices.
I encourage all Bramptonians to stop by, meet their neighbours, spend some time with their families, but most importantly, try some tasty treats.
Men's Mental HealthMr. Matt Jeneroux (Edmonton Riverbend, CPC): Mr. Speaker, about six years ago, I stood in the Alberta legislature for the first time to share my story of undergoing a significant level of anxiety and depression, which many young men and young fathers often face.
As part of my story, I shared the feelings of being nervous, anxious, depressed, and scared of the prospect of being a new father. Like me, many young men and young dads have this sense of fear, and it is important that men across the country realize that they are not immune to these diagnoses simply because they are men.
 We are told to be tough, to be strong, not to cry, and to toughen up. We are told not to share our feelings and that it is not normal to have feelings of depression. I want young men, young fathers to know that today, we can have these feelings. We can talk to someone about them, and we can stamp out the stigma.
 Mental health issues in young men happen, but it is okay. Each conversation gets us closer to a world where we can rely on each other. Today, our event Father's Day on the Hill was another step to give men more courage so that no one suffers in silence.
Mr. Majid Jowhari (Richmond Hill, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today my colleague from across the aisle, the representative from Edmonton Riverbend, as well as the Mental Health Commission of Canada and I, hosted an event commemorating Men's Health Week and Father's Day, highlighting the mental health crisis facing men in our country.
 In Canada, 80% of those who take their own life are men, real men in a real crisis, who are unable to recognize their own struggle, to speak to and confide in those who love them, and to seek the support and treatment they need.
 When diagnosing mental illness, we are better equipped and more comfortable identifying the signifiers more commonly presented by women than the signifiers of internal struggle by men. Men are more likely to lose their social circle as they age, and less likely to speak to their family about their own mental health issues.
 Together, we heard the stories of those who struggle, connected with experts, and created a strong dialogue on the issue of mental health for men. I thank all those members who joined us at this reception.
Youth ChallengesMs. Niki Ashton (Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, NDP): Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago the Prime Minister spoke at the NYU graduation in the U.S.
 While he philosophized in the U.S., here at home our grads are facing a challenging time. l want to invite him to attend any one of the graduations in our north, here in Canada, to hear their stories: Thompson, faced with the loss of the smelter and refinery; first nations facing continuing high unemployment and underfunding of education; Churchill, still faced with the shutdown of the port and the rail line.
 He could attend a graduation in virtually any community across Canada to hear what young people are facing in terms of sky-high tuition fees and precarious employment, but I doubt he will. 
I believe he does not want to listen to young people who are concerned about the environment, growing inequality, and their economic future. When it comes to the Prime Minister and his policies, young people are increasingly saying that the Liberal government not only is not part of the solution, but it is increasingly part of the problem.
120th Anniversary of YukonHon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in the summer of 1896, three men, Skookum Jim, George Carmack, and Tagish Charlie, found large gold nuggets in the gravel bottom of Bonanza Creek. Their cry of joy started the world's greatest gold rush. Approximately 200,000 men and women from all over the world converged on the Klondike in search of gold. More than 40,000 of them found it.
 In 1898, Dawson City was the largest Canadian city west of Winnipeg, and Yukon, for so long the proud home of first nations people, was created from the western area of the Northwest Territories.
On today's date, June 13, 1898, assent was given for the Yukon Act, and four years later, in 1902, we sent our first member to Parliament, James H. Ross, a Liberal. 
I stand to commemorate the 120th anniversary of the founding of Yukon territory. I invite all members and their families to come north this summer to visit the most beautiful riding in the country, enjoy Yukon hospitality, and bask in the glow of the midnight sun.
2018 GraduatesMr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate all of the 2018 graduates, who have worked tirelessly to achieve this important milestone. As they embark on their new journeys, I would like to wish them the very best that life has to offer. May their efforts be rewarded with happiness and success.
Unfortunately, Justin Trudeau's mismanagement of the economy will cost these bright graduates. The harsh reality of high taxes will make the beginning of their new lives—
The Speaker: Order. I have to remind the member that he cannot use the names of members in the House, but should refer to them by their title or their riding name.
The hon. member for Prince Albert.
Randy Hoback:  The reality of high taxes will make life harsher for these individuals as they progress to their new futures.
 However, youth is the hope of the future, and these bright graduates have it within their power to make the world a better place. They are the building blocks of our country. I am confident that Canada will continue to prosper due to the strong foundation that these future leaders will provide.
 To all the 2018 graduates, the future of Canada lies in their hands, and I am so excited to witness all the wonderful things they will accomplish. I congratulate them, and may success be theirs.
Plastic-free July ChallengeMs. Julie Dabrusin (Toronto—Danforth, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am challenging you, people in our communities, and people across our country to take the plastics challenge in July. 
It is estimated that as much as eight million tonnes of plastic ends up in our oceans each year.
This year, we banned microbeads, and Canada championed and endorsed a plastics charter at the G7 summit, but there is a personal element to the solution, too. Knowing that only about 10% of plastics get recycled in Canada, we need to reduce, reuse, and recycle.
On my website and Facebook page, there is a plastic-free July challenge sign-up. I invite people and businesses in my community and across the country to either sign up or start their own plastic-free July challenge.
This July, use a reusable shopping bag, refuse the plastic straw, or use a reusable bottle. Together, we can end plastics pollution.
National Blood Donor WeekMr. Francis Drouin (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to highlight National Blood Donor Week, which runs until June 17. This year marks the 10th anniversary of this special week. 
It cannot be overemphasized how blood donation is a vital gesture and how important it is to educate citizens about this issue. To meet the needs of patients this summer, Canadian Blood Services needs 44,000 donors by Canada Day. 
I would like to congratulate the 406,000 people who have donated blood over the past year. Half of all Canadians will one day need blood themselves or know someone who will.
I would therefore like to thank all past, present, and future donors. They have saved, and will continue to save, thousands of lives. I urge all Canadians and all members here today to donate blood if they can.
Government PerformanceMr. Pat Kelly (Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC): Mr. Speaker, as we prepare to rise for the summer, I thought I would take a moment to review the government's 2018 performance to date.
The year began with the government's odious summer jobs attestation, and quickly proceeded to its refusal to recognize the coming Trans Mountain crisis. Then the Prime Minister went to India with a convicted terrorist and tried to blame the Indian government. The environment minister tabled a regulatory bill that industry says will kill all future resource development. The finance minister tabled a budget, which continues to rack up promise breaking deficits, implement a carbon tax, and refused to answer any questions about either.
Throw in a couple of new ethics investigations, an electoral reform bill designed to help third party proxies for the Liberals, capital flight, the Trans Mountain buyout debacle, chaos at our borders, more red tape for gun owners, a justice bill that helps criminals, and a $7-billion dollar slush fund, and I am sure those on the government side are ready for a summer break. However, with a session like this, so are Canadians.
Centre for Ocean Ventures & EntrepreneurshipMr. Darren Fisher (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, our government believes in Atlantic Canada. We are 32 members strong, working together for our region.
 Just last week, the Centre for Ocean Ventures &amp; Entrepreneurship, known as COVE, officially launched in my riding of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour. COVE is an incredible facility for applied innovation in the oceans sector. It is the only hub like it in the entire world: start-ups, small and medium-sized enterprises, larger firms, and post-secondary expertise all under one roof in Dartmouth developing ocean technology.
 There is nowhere in Nova Scotia more than 67 kilometres away from the ocean, making this the perfect location to strengthen our ocean economy from coat to coast to coast.
I am proud that our government invested $7.2 million in COVE, partnering with the Province of Nova Scotia and Irving Shipbuilding. When we work together, we always achieve more.
I congratulate everyone who made COVE possible. Atlantic Canada has a bright future.
World Cup of SoccerHon. Pablo Rodriguez (Chief Government Whip, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the FIFA World Cup kicks off tomorrow in Russia. Over the next few weeks, we will get to see our favourite players in action, including Neymar, Ronaldo, Iniesta, Salah, and, of course, Messi.
In 2026, all the action will be happening right here in Canada, as well as in the United States and Mexico.
With this major event, our country continues to build a strong history of hosting FIFA events, including the U-20 World Cup in 2007, the U-20 Women's World Cup in 2014, and most recently, the 2015 Women's World Cup.
With games in Edmonton, Toronto, and in my hometown of Montreal, we look forward to welcoming soccer fans from around the world back to Canada in 2026.
That is when the world will discover the next generation of players, the Maradonas, Pelés, Ronaldos, and Messis of tomorrow.
We will continue to invest in our athletes, and maybe the next star will be one of our own, a young person from Ottawa, Quebec City, or Moncton.
The eyes of the world will be on us in 2026, and we will not disappoint.
Democratic ReformMr. Blaine Calkins (Red Deer—Lacombe, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Liberal elections bill, Bill C-76, would do nothing to modernize our democratic process. In fact, this dangerous bill would encourage foreign entities to interfere in our elections and undermine our democracy.
 Other countries have seen the consequences of foreign interference in elections. It would be naive to presume Canada is immune. In fact, reports indicate that foreign third parties spent millions of dollars in the 2015 federal election. The American Tides Foundation alone donated $1.5 million to influence its outcome.
 We should not allow our elections to be decided by foreign organizations or individuals with deep pockets.
I have tabled Bill C-406 to address this very issue. Bill C-406 would amend the Canada Elections Act to ban foreign contributions to third parties for election advertising purposes.
 Canadians, and Canadians only, should be determining the results of our next election. It is the right thing to do; it is the patriotic thing to do.
I look forward to the debate on this bill and seeing where the other parties in the House will put their interests, either with Canada or their own. Any member who votes against the bill is voting in favour of foreign interference in our elections. I guess we will see.
House of Commons Page ProgramMr. Nick Whalen (St. John's East, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I wish I could say that the final score does not reflect how close the match was or that, this time, no pages were injured by the member for St. John's East. Sadly, I cannot.
Last night, in their final tune-up game before the World Cup, the pages, led by Ariana Coleman, Brandon Gertz, Sebastien Arsenault, Sylvan Lutz, and Michael Donaghy, thrashed the MPs on the all-party FC Commoners soccer team in our annual match.
It was all tied up at the half when the pages' goalie, Zachary Robichaud, went down hard on a save. We hope Zack is okay. After halftime, the MPs had an uphill battle both literally and figuratively. The final score: pages 5, MPs 1.
 A victory that happens once every 40 years is a good way to round off the 40th anniversary of the parliamentary page program. 
I ask all members to rise with me to thank and congratulate our pages. Long live the pages.
Women's SheltersMs. Linda Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, violence against women and children is recognized nationally and internationally as a significant barrier to gender equality and to women's human rights and fundamental freedoms. I wish today to recognize the dedication of those serving in Canada's shelters for women and children.
 In 2017, Alberta shelters provided refuge and support for over 10,000 women and children fleeing violence. A key barrier to effective action against domestic violence has been failed coordination and consistent responses by community, police, and government.
I was honoured to attend the launch of a positive new initiative for the Alberta Council of Women's Shelters, targeting this very problem. The program, jointly financed by federal and provincial governments, brings together RCMP, police, shelters, government agencies, and communities to offer coherent, coordinated, longer-term support. This evidence-based program is women-centred, addresses gender inequalities, holds perpetrators accountable, enables better collaboration, ensures healing for violence related to trauma, and better serves the diversities of communities needing support and escape from violence.
I invite all MPs to join me in saluting Shelters Canada—
The Speaker: The hon. member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock.
Carbon PricingMr. Jamie Schmale (Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, CPC): Mr. Speaker, last week the Wynne Liberals were fired by Ontarians for wasting billions of taxpayer dollars and refusing to come clean with the cost of an unrealistic energy plan and a poorly considered carbon-tax scheme.
 The Prime Minister has had six days now to consider the ramifications of not owning up to Canadians about the true cost of his carbon tax on the average family. He knows his scheme will increase the cost of living for every single Canadian. The PBO confirmed it, saying that it would cost $10 billion. Other estimates pegged the true cost as high as $35 billion per year, sounding the death knell for future investment in Canada.
 A significant investment exodus to the U.S. is under way in real time for a more favourable investment climate buoyed by lower corporate taxes. Canadians understand we cannot tax our way to a cleaner environment, and they are making their voices heard at the ballot box.
 Conservatives will fight for lower taxes, and we will keep calling for the Liberals to end their carbon tax cover-up.
National Public Service WeekMr. Steven MacKinnon (Gatineau, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today in honour of National Public Service Week.
As the member for Gatineau, I have the good fortune to represent many public servants. This week, as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement Canada, I attended several activities to thank public servants for the important work they do every day.
With their knowledge and outstanding expertise, public servants play a vital role in running the day-to-day operations of every department and agency in the Government of Canada. 
The reason we are celebrating National Public Service Week is that we on this side of the House believe in government and respect the work our public servants do. We see the commitment and dedication they put into their work every day to make a positive impact on the lives of all Canadians.
Happy National Public Service Week!

Oral Questions
Carbon PricingHon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, more and more Canadians understand that the Prime Minister's carbon tax will not make a significant difference to global emissions. What it will do is increase the cost of living, making everything more expensive, especially the cost to fuel their cars.
 I think even the Prime Minister understands this, because he is going to great lengths to hide the information from Canadians. He still, after weeks and months, refuses to tell Canadians the true cost of his carbon tax.
 Will the Prime Minister finally do the right thing today, end the carbon tax cover-up, and tell Canadians how much it will cost?
Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I look forward to answering that question, and subsequent questions.
 I do want to take a moment right now to personally thank the Leader of the Opposition, indeed all opposition MPs, and indeed all Canadians for standing together in this moment of difficulties in our relationship with the United States. How we will continue to work together on standing up for Canadian workers and for Canadian interests is something beyond partisanship.
 I thank the member opposite, all members in the House, and Canadians across Canada for their solidarity on this issue.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for his sentiments. I can commit to him that the Conservatives will always support efforts to keep markets open, keep borders open, and protect Canadian jobs and the Canadian economy.
Now, there are a lot of things we cannot control. As the Government of Canada knows, it cannot control all the external factors. However, what it can control is how it manages Canada's economy.
 More and more people in Canada are rejecting the idea of a carbon tax, knowing that it will devastate jobs and opportunities here in Canada. Ontario has now joined the group of provinces that opposes a carbon tax.
 The Prime Minister's coalition for his carbon tax is unravelling. Will he finally come clean on how much the costs will be for Canadian families?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, after 10 years of the Harper Conservatives not doing anything on the environment, the Conservatives show that they still do not get it.
 While our plan to put a price on carbon pollution will reduce emissions and drive innovation at the same time, the Conservatives double down on the failed Stephen Harper approach. In 2015, Canadians told the Conservatives that the Harper approach was wrong. However, now it is obvious that, as usual, the Conservatives have not been listening.
We will continue to invest in clean growth to ensure a prosperous future for all our kids right across the country.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are not listening. They are not listening to the fact that the people of Ontario rejected Kathleen Wynne's approach, which damaged the economy and did nothing to reduce emissions.
 The Prime Minister is following the exact same playbook that Ontario has rejected. Saskatchewan opposed the carbon tax, and soon Alberta will join the fight against the carbon tax.
 If the Prime Minister is so sure that Canadians will support his carbon tax, why can he not tell them how much it will cost?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, to follow on the same thinking as the member opposite, let me highlight that two and a half years ago Canadians rejected the Stephen Harper approach on the economy and the environment. Not only for 10 years did the Conservatives do nothing to protect the environment, they also did not have much in the way of economic growth to show for it.
 On top of demonstrating that we understand that the environment and the economy go together, we have created economic growth in our country, the best in the G7 last year; 600,000 new jobs; and the lowest unemployment rate in a generation. These are the choices we have made for Canadians.
Immigration, Refugees and CitizenshipAndrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, up to 400 people per day are expected to cross the Quebec border illegally this summer. 
The Prime Minister has turned Roxham Road into a welcoming haven, with lots of staff. It is hard to blame asylum seekers for thinking they can cross the border in that area.
When will the Prime Minister take decisive action to address the root of the problem, instead of spending millions of dollars of taxpayer money on temporary solutions? 
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we continue to assure Canadians that our immigration system is working. We have the capacity to review all of these cases. We are making sure that all of the rules and measures of our immigration and refugee system are being followed. I do not want people to be afraid just because the Conservatives are engaging in fearmongering and divisive tactics for partisan purposes. 
If the Conservatives seriously wanted to show respect for our border services workers, they would not have cut nearly $400 million from their—
The Speaker: Order. The hon. Leader of the Opposition.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect our immigration system to operate in an orderly, safe, and compassionate manner. It is unacceptable to millions of Canadians, including the groups of refugees and immigrants I met in Toronto over the last few days who came here legally, who have family members facing persecution even today, who have loved ones in camps in dangerous places all over the world. They are frustrated that the Prime Minister is pitting one group of asylum seekers against another. They are frustrated at the idea that people can cross over illegally from a safe country while their friends and family have to wait. 
Why does the Prime Minister—
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Oh, oh!
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, that question was a perfect example of how the Conservatives are using misinformation to create fear and division within Canadians. Pitting groups of Canadians against one another is entirely irresponsible.
On this side of the House, we are committed to a compassionate asylum system, all the while ensuring that only those who should be in Canada are allowed to stay. In contrast, the former Conservative government cut $390 million from the CBSA and cut refugee health care. They created massive backlogs and processing delays, which we are still working to fix.
Natural ResourcesMr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP): Mr. Speaker, “The Crown failed to meaningfully consult in relation to title, governance rights and use rights. Instead, it dodged, deferred, delegated....” These are the words of Upper Nicola Band counsel Elin Sigurdson. This is the same Upper Nicola band that wants to build the largest solar energy project in British Columbia. 
For a climate leader, the choice between green energy and buying a pipeline should be obvious. A leader in reconciliation with indigenous peoples should respect and empower first nations and their choices. Why cannot the Prime Minister do either?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we understand the importance of listening to all voices when it comes to major projects. We know there are a variety of opinions, including within indigenous communities. Some oppose this project, while others strongly support it.
 While the NDP only listens to those who share their opinion, we ensure that all voices are respected and heard. We completed the deepest consultations with rights holders ever for a major project in this country, and we established a co-developed monitoring committee with indigenous communities, including representation from the Nicola band. We have listened, and we will continue to listen.
Guy Caron: Mr. Speaker, that is the point. The government did not listen.
Again, Upper Nicola band counsel had these harsh words for the government: the Crown failed to meaningfully consult in relation to title, governance rights and use rights. Instead, it dodged, deferred, and delegated.
The Upper Nicola community wants to build the largest solar energy project in British Columbia, a project that could light 5,000 homes. Instead the government wants to impose a pipeline that the community does not want.
How can a Prime Minister who claims to be a leader in both climate change and reconciliation with indigenous peoples act in such a way?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we understand the importance of listening to all voices. We know there are a variety of opinions, including within indigenous communities. Some oppose this project, while others strongly support it. While the New Democrats only listen to those who share their views, we make sure that all voices are respected and heard. 
We held the broadest consultations with rights holders ever, and we established a monitoring committee with indigenous communities, including the Upper Nicola band community. We have listened, and we will continue to listen. 
Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP):  Mr. Speaker, according to a study by Cambridge University, a foreseeable and inevitable drop in global demand for oil will burst the carbon bubble. This will happen between 2030 and 2050.
In one fell swoop, oil infrastructure will become worthless. So, what did the Prime Minister  do? He bought an old pipeline with $4.5 billion of our money. What timing. What a vision for the future. It is like someone investing in VHS players in 1990.
Why not take the billions of dollars and invest them in sustainable energy and lasting jobs?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the NDP still believes that we have to choose between the economy and the environment. We all know that we can create jobs and protect the environment at the same time. That is why we are putting a price on pollution, protecting our coasts and oceans, and investing in clean technology. That is why we are also diversifying our export markets, since 70% of Canada's exports go to the U.S.
In light of recent events, it is surprising that the NDP continues to oppose economic diversification projects that are in the national interest.
Mr. Murray Rankin (Victoria, NDP): Mr. Speaker, Canada should be investing in clean, renewable energy sources that create good quality, long-lasting jobs for today's workers and future generations. 
Instead of looking to the future and eliminating fossil fuel subsidies as they promised, the Liberals have become huge supporters and investors in the oil industry. If they vote against the NDP motion, the Liberals will undermine Canada's commitment we made to the world in Paris and ignore the transition that we need to renewables.
Will the Liberals support our motion and ensure real climate leadership?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the NDP continue to believe that there is a choice to be made between the environment and the economy. What we have demonstrated is a pan-Canadian climate plan that features a national price on carbon, that features protecting our oceans and coasts, and yes, does include a pipeline to new markets other than the United States.
Why the NDP continues to think, given all the recent events, that it is not a good idea to diversify our resource markets is beyond me. There is no question that those members simply do not get it.
International TradeAndrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, steel workers reiterated their call for immediate steel and aluminum countermeasures. Revenue is being lost. This situation is affecting Canadian steel and aluminum producers, employees, and their families.
The United States has been imposing unreasonable tariffs for nearly two weeks now. Mexico reacted almost immediately, but we are still waiting.
Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and impose tariffs on American steel and aluminum today?
Justin Trudeau:  Mr. Speaker, we have been unequivocal. The tariffs are completely unacceptable. The Canadian and American economies are so closely linked that these tariffs will also harm American workers.
We will defend our industries and Canadian workers. We will impose up to $16.6 billion in trade restrictions on American imports.
 The American decision goes against NAFTA and the WTO rules, and we will do everything we can to dispute it. We want Canadian workers to know that they can count on their government.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the state of the current negotiations to preserve NAFTA, there is obviously a great deal of confusion. Yesterday, the Prime Minister had a chance to come clean and be clear about one aspect though. 
On Sunday, the CBC reported that the U.S. administration had “waved away”and finally dropped its demand for a five-year sunset clause, something the Prime Minister had said was a major sticking point.
Can the Prime Minister clearly state whether or not that report was in fact accurate?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I can state without equivocation, that the United States has not yet waived its demand for a NAFTA sunset clause.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, can the Prime Minister confirm or deny that the waiving of the sunset clause was at least offered during his talks with the U.S. President?
Justin Trudeau: No, Mr. Speaker. With the American President, as is regularly, we engaged on a broad range of subjects, including in which I reiterated that the sunset clause on NAFTA would be absolutely unacceptable, that Canada could never sign a NAFTA with a sunset clause in it, and he did not immediately back down.
Andrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, we all know that a protracted trade disruption will have a devastating impact on Canada's economy, workers, and their families. But there are a lot of things a government could do to protect Canada's economy. 
We knew that the U.S. administration would have a new relationship with Canada as soon as the U.S. election was over, yet in last spring's budget the Prime Minister failed to have a single contingency plan set aside, and that is with an $18-billion deficit.
 In addition, the Liberals have been dragging their feet on implementing the TPP. The TPP could open up new markets and diversify our trading relationship.
Why has the Prime Minister waited so long to implement the TPP?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am going to return to the previous question, because I want everyone to be very clear on this. I do not know exactly where the Conservatives are going with it, but I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
The sunset clause has been something that I have said without equivocation from the beginning would be unacceptable in a NAFTA. I have said that many times to the President. The President has not, so far, as far as we know, and we have seen his tweets, responded to or withdrawn his offer, his demand, for a sunset clause in NAFTA. Let us be very clear about that.
Foreign AffairsAndrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, after months of pursuing a wrong-headed policy of appeasement towards Iran, the Liberals finally agreed with the Conservative Party to have a more forceful response to the Iranian regime.
It was just last month that Liberal senators defeated Conservative proposed legislation to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist group. Now, I want to know clearly from the Prime Minister, because moments after the vote was held his own officials in the Department of Public Safety refused to acknowledge that this important step of naming the IRGC as a terrorist organization would be kept.
 Will the Prime Minister confirm that he will actually follow the will of the House?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we deeply oppose Iran's support for terrorist organizations, its threat towards Israel, its ballistic missile program, and its support for the murderous Assad regime. We will always defend human rights and hold Iran to account for its actions. 
We led a resolution at the UN in November calling on Iran to comply with its international human rights obligations. We continue to maintain sanctions on Iran, which include restrictions on sensitive goods and a list of individuals and entities subject to asset freezes with whom all transactions involving property are prohibited.
Public Services and ProcurementAndrew Scheer: Mr. Speaker, he still cannot answer the simple question about following the will of the House as voted here just this week.
When the Auditor General's report was tabled, the report that was highly critical of the government's handling of many files, the Minister of Public Services thanked the Auditor General and proclaimed that “...We are accepting all of his recommendations”. However, yesterday, the Prime Minister's very own Clerk of the Privy Council dismissed the Auditor General's recent report, calling it “an opinion piece”.
Which is it? Does the Prime Minister share the views of his minister or his senior civil servant? In other words, does he accept the Auditor General's report that his own government—
The Speaker: The Right Hon. Prime Minister.
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are lucky to have a world-class public service, which just last year was recognized as the most effective in the world.
 We are working to change the culture in the public service following 10 years of Conservative government that muzzled scientists, used tax dollars for partisan advertising, and made irresponsible and ideologically driven cuts.
We were given a mandate to restore a culture of respect for and within Canada's non-partisan public service, and to instill a culture of experimentation, evidence-based policy, and implementation. 
We will continue to work towards achieving that objective, and as the head of the public service said, there is still more work to do.
Natural ResourcesMs. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Speaker, two days after the purchase of the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the company received a letter from the government stating that it had committed four offences. It had gone months without filing mandatory monitoring reports with the government and first nations, and it exceeded safe underwater noise limits during expansion, endangering marine wildlife. 
Knowing about these violations and all the rest, why on earth would the government bail out Kinder Morgan with billions of Canadians' hard-earned money?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives failed to secure access to markets other than the United States for Canadian resources for over 10 years. This failure is costing $15 billion a year to Canadians. The NDP believes that this enormous cost should continue to apply to Canadians every single year. 
It is critically important that we diversify our export markets all the while making historical investments to protect our environment. While the NDP's plan is to keep Canadian resources locked into a single market, we are working to protect and create Canadian jobs, while protecting the environment for future generations. 
Ms. Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP): Mr. Speaker, giving away billions of dollars to a company that has zero respect for Canada's environmental regulations is the antithesis of leading the fight against climate change.
Using public money to buy a pipeline is not visionary. Exposing Canadians to the environmental and financial risks associated with the pipeline is totally unfair. 
Instead of throwing money at energy sources of the past, the government must invest in energy sources of the future.
Why does the Prime Minister just not get it?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest it is the NDP that just does not get it because not having access to markets other than the United States for our oil resources is costing us $15 billion per year.
The Conservatives spent 10 years trying to diversify our energy resource markets, but they failed. We are succeeding because we know that creating jobs and economic growth while protecting our environment is the best way to build a strong future for all Canadians. That is exactly what we are doing.
Hon. Lisa Raitt (Milton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, by law, is appointed by the Minister of Finance, and it is deliberately kept independent of political interference. There is a good reason. The board manages workers' money, and it has to make sure that there is no undue risk in its investments, because it has to make sure there is money available for our retirement. 
I was very interested to see that the minister and the Prime Minister said that the private sector was not interested in the Trans Mountain pipeline because it was risky. Will the Prime Minister tell the Minister of Finance to back off the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and tell him that it is going to go to private sector investments? 
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to inform the member opposite that the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board operates at arm's length, with a mandate to invest in the best interests of its members. Many investors have already expressed interest in the project, including indigenous groups, Canadian pension funds, and others.
The fact that we are moving forward and succeeding, where the Conservatives failed for 10 years to get our exports to markets other than the United States, is making them grasp at straws, and flailing for partisan approaches, when they should be pleased that for once we have actually delivered what they could not do for—
The Speaker: Order. The hon. member for Milton.
Lisa Raitt: Mr. Speaker, private sector investment fled this project, and the Minister of Finance indicated that he asked pension plans whether or not they would be interested. He asked the Canada pension plan board if it was interested, which is a clear conflict. When that did not work, he actually hired a U.S. bank to come in and lobby the Canada pension plan board, an arm's length organization. 
Money from the federal reserve, money from the Canada pension plan, money from the Canada Infrastructure Bank, is all workers' money. Can he guarantee, as the Prime Minister, that not a single taxpayer dollar is going to be left on the hook because of their failure? 
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, perhaps we have just seen why the Conservatives were unable to get the pipeline built for 10 years. They do not have confidence in the workers, in the oil sector, or in the capacity of Canadians to get these resources to market profitably. That is what we are hearing from them. They do not believe this pipeline is going to work. 
On this side of the House, we have Alberta's back. We have Canada's back. We are there to make sure that we get our resources to new markets, despite the worries and naysaying of the Conservative Party of Canada.
CannabisMr. Alain Rayes (Richmond—Arthabaska, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Quebec National Assembly passed its cannabis bill yesterday. It legislates a maximum of 150 grams per household, zero tolerance for driving under the influence, and a ban on home cultivation.
My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is he finally going to respect provincial jurisdictions and let Quebec, and every Canadian province, as well as first nations, legislate in their own areas of jurisdiction?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to acknowledge that everyone across Canada and in every jurisdiction agrees that it is time to put an end to the present system, which fails to protect our children and puts billions of dollars every year into the hands of organized crime, and replace it with a better system that controls and regulates the sale of marijuana.
We consulted experts, we worked very hard, and we listened to what the experts had to say. Our decision has been made and we firmly believe that these measures are the best way to protect Canadians, our youth, and our communities, and that is what we are going to do.
Alain Rayes: Mr. Speaker, this government never listened to health experts, police forces, business leaders, municipalities, first nations, or the Senate, which spent many hours doing incredible work. Now, the provinces, who have asked for more time, are asking us to simply respect their jurisdictions.
Again, my question for the Prime Minister is very simple. Will he respect the jurisdictions of Canada's provinces as well as those of first nations, and allow them to prohibit home cultivation of cannabis?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to note that we always respect the provinces and indigenous peoples, as well as the work that they do. We are putting forward a bill that will protect our children and prevent organized crime from making huge profits from the sale of marijuana. The Conservatives keep playing politics with this issue.
I want to thank the senators and every expert who spoke to this issue. We are moving forward with measures that will protect Canadians.
International TradeMs. Karine Trudel (Jonquière, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the NDP supports the government's decision to impose retaliatory tariffs in response to the Trump administration's tariffs on steel and aluminum.
However, last year, the White House imposed a surtax on our softwood lumber and despite months of pressure the government only hatched a timid plan of loan guarantees and employment insurance.
This time, will the government properly do its homework and announce a program of adequate support for workers and for SMEs in our steel and aluminum sector as Quebec did?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, as I have said several times, Canadian steel and aluminum workers have our unconditional support. These tariffs are completely unacceptable. Consequently, we intend to impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and other goods from the United States. We will impose tariffs on the U.S. equivalent to those imposed on Canadian goods.
As I told steel and aluminum workers when I visited plants across the country, we will always be there to defend them.
Tracey Ramsey: Mr. Speaker, that is interesting, because I do not believe you have met with them since the tariffs came on.
We are talking about the livelihoods of at least 50,000—
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Order. The member is asking if I have met with someone. I know the member knows that she must direct her comments to the Chair, and I will ask her to do that.
The hon. member for Essex.
Tracey Ramsey: Mr. Speaker, the workers know that the Liberals have not yet met with them since these tariffs went on. We are talking about the livelihoods of at least 50,000 workers employed directly by the steel and aluminum industries and all those who depend on them. Trump's tariffs have already started affecting the lives of workers and communities that simply cannot wait for support from their government.
The government says it was prepared for the worst-case scenario. If that is true, then why is the government not telling workers what its plan is to protect Canadian jobs? Where is the plan?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, within hours of the U.S. government imposing these new tariffs on steel and aluminum, we had a clear response worth $16.6 billion on steel, on aluminum, and on other products coming into Canada from the United States. We have been working on contingency plans, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, and all Canadians, that we will be there to support and stand with our aluminum and steel workers. That is what I told them across the country when I was visiting with them. That is what I continue to tell them as I speak to them across the country through their leadership and the media.
Status of WomenMrs. Alexandra Mendès (Brossard—Saint-Lambert, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, refocusing Canada's international assistance on the most vulnerable, especially women and girls, is not just about words or simple rebranding. It takes commitment and concrete actions.
Could the Prime Minister tell the House what progress was made at the G7 summit with respect to education for women and girls?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Brossard—Saint-Lambert for her work on gender equality. Everyone must have equal access to a quality education.
In Charlevoix, we announced a fund worth nearly $3.8 billion to increase equal access to quality education for girls and women and to address the barriers that prevent them from accessing education. This is the largest-ever investment in education for women and girls in crisis situations, and it will have a real impact on women and girls around the world.
Carbon PricingHon. Pierre Poilievre (Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my question is about the carbon tax cover-up. The Fraser Institute calculates that the Prime Minister has raised income tax on 81% of middle-class families, on average by $800 per family. The PBO says this new carbon tax will axe $10 billion from our GDP, but Finance Canada, because of the government, is blacking out the cost to the average Canadian family.
 Will he end the carbon tax cover-up and tell us how much it will cost Canadians?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, let me begin by reminding the member opposite that not only was the first thing we did lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them for the wealthiest 1%, but that member actually voted against those measures to lower taxes on the middle class.
In regard to pricing carbon pollution, I can highlight that 86% of our economy already has a price on carbon pollution in their jurisdictions. We will continue to work to make sure there is fairness across the country as we move forward on protecting our environment for future generations and spurring innovation and the growth of jobs in our economy.
Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, Canadians are used to Liberals making a promise and then breaking it. This Prime Minister actually makes a promise after he has already broken it. He said that he would not raise taxes on middle-class families, and we now know, from the Fraser Institute's calculation, an institute that he has cited in his remarks today, that he has raised taxes on 81% of middle-class families, and that is before this new carbon tax.
How much will that new tax cost the average Canadian family?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am used to the member opposite completely misinterpreting my statements, but now he is misinterpreting and misreading the Fraser Institute's report.
We have lowered taxes on the middle class. It was, in fact, the very first thing we did. We raised them on the wealthiest 1%. On top of that, we delivered a Canada child benefit that delivered more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families, with tax-free money every month to help with the cost of groceries and school supplies.
Unfortunately, both of those initiatives are things the Conservatives voted against.
Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister accuses me of misrepresenting the Fraser Institute's report? Wait now. That is interesting, because the authors of that report have actually taken to the newspapers with an op-ed saying that he has misrepresented their research. I will be happy to send him over that op-ed. They calculate that he raised taxes on 80% of middle-class families. How much more will those same families have to pay with his new carbon tax?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, the Conservatives showed low growth because they favoured boutique tax cuts for wealthy Canadians who might vote for them instead of helping the middle-class and those working hard to join it.
That is why Canadians made a better choice in 2015 and put their trust in the Liberal government that lowered taxes for the middle class, raised them on the wealthiest 1%, is delivering a Canada child benefit that helps nine out of 10 Canadian families, and stopped sending the child benefit cheques to millionaires the Conservatives were so attached to.
We have created the strongest growth in the G7 for 2017, and we are going to—
The Speaker: The hon. member for Carleton.
TaxationPierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister calls them boutique tax credits for the wealthy. He says that any family that used the public transit tax credit to take the bus is too wealthy. He says that any dad or mom who used the children's fitness tax credit to put kids in hockey are too wealthy. He says that any family that wanted to use income splitting to have a stay-at-home dad is too wealthy.
Is that not just a little bit rich from a trust fund Prime Minister who lives in a tax-funded mansion?
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Order, order. The Right Hon. Prime Minister.
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, as soon as the Conservatives run out of flailing arguments, they turn to personal attacks. It is the same old, same old from them. That is what we got for 10 years instead of the kind of growth that middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them needed. That is why we focused on Canadians over the past two and a half years, delivering the middle-class tax cut, delivering the Canada child benefit, delivering a strengthened CPP, delivering an increase in the guaranteed income supplement for our most vulnerable seniors, delivering on the Canada workers benefit, delivering on infrastructure investments that are going to help Canadians across the country. That is what we have done.
Immigration, Refugees and CitizenshipMs. Sheila Malcolmson (Nanaimo—Ladysmith, NDP): Mr. Speaker, reuniting families is something the Prime Minister says he values, yet whether or not someone's parents and grandparents can come to Canada is all based on the luck of the draw. Imagine, a lottery decides whether they will be reunited with their loved ones. Last year, hundreds of spots remained unfilled due to errors, and critics say the process used can easily be rigged.
 How can the Prime Minister justify family reunification that is based on a lottery?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we inherited a system from the Conservative government that had multiplied wait times. Family and spousal reunification was up to over 24 months. We have drastically cut wait times. We recognize there is more to do and we are working hard on that, but after all the cuts we inherited, we recognize that is going to take some time. We continue to invest in our immigration system. We understand that family reunification, opportunities for integration, and a compassionate and fair immigration system that continues to be rigorously applied are important to all Canadians and that is what we are delivering.
Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, last fall, the Liberals promised to establish visa-free access to Canada for Ukrainians, but yesterday, visiting MPs from Ukraine confirmed that those talks have stalled out.
In light of the situation with Russia, it has become more important than ever to strengthen our ties with Ukraine.
Given that Ukraine already has visa-free access to the EU and that Canada already has a trade agreement with Ukraine, people want to know what exactly it is the Liberals are waiting for. When will the government finally get a deal done to ensure visa-free access for Ukrainians to Canada?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, Canada continues to be a strong and steadfast friend to Ukraine, whether it is standing up against the illegal Russian annexation of Crimea or Russia's interference in the Donbas, whether it is working with our troops in Ukraine to continue to train Ukrainian forces, whether it is signing and moving forward with a Canada-Ukraine trade deal, or whether it is continuing to look for closer trade ties between our countries. As I told President Poroshenko just a few days ago when I spoke with him, we will continue to support Ukraine in its march toward greater progress and greater success for everyone.
EmploymentHon. Candice Bergen (Portage—Lisgar, CPC): Mr. Speaker, last Saturday, in downtown Toronto in what can only be described as a rally intended to incite hatred toward Jews and others, Sheik Shafiq Hudda of the Islamic Humanitarian Service called for the eradication of Israelis, and genocide. Some of his anti-Semitic hate speech aimed at the Jewish community included telling them, “You will leave in body bags.” 
Will the Prime Minister condemn these hate-filled anti-Semitic comments?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we always condemn hate-filled anti-Semitic or homophobic or Islamophobic and hate-filled speech of all types across this country. Canada is a welcoming, diverse country of a broad range of views and perspectives, but we do not allow hate speech and we do not allow the incitement of hatred. 
We are a country that is built on mutual respect, on openness and compassion, and we reject the politics of division and hate wherever they come from.
Candice Bergen: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's actions speak otherwise. On one hand, he is giving these anti-Semitic religious extremists taxpayers' dollars to actively promote hatred using funds from the Canada summer jobs program. On the other, he has denied funding to faith groups that want to help those in need. 
Why is the Prime Minister allowing certain religious organizations to be funded to promote hatred toward Jews, but saying no to churches that want to help the homeless?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, this is not an issue of faith or beliefs. 
We can tell they are still Stephen Harper's Conservatives when they advocate for organizations like the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform to receive public funds, which are then used to attack a woman's right to choose. We believe that public funds should never be used to actively fight against the rights of Canadians, and we will ensure that no money from the Canada summer jobs program is re-funded to organizations that violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that use hate against other Canadians of any type, whether they be women, Jewish community groups, or LGBTQ—
The Speaker: Order. There is far too much noise.
The hon. member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis.
Hon. Steven Blaney (Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC): Mr. Speaker, if that is the case, how come the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is giving funds to the organization that just last weekend called for the eradication of Israelis? Last weekend, Sheik Shafiq Hudda of the Islamic Humanitarian Service made statements that were criminal.
When is the Prime Minister going to take action? Above all, does this pass the Liberal test, or is it illegal? Is he going to take concrete steps to make sure this never happens again?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we unequivocally condemn these statements. Such statements are unacceptable in Canadian society. Our society is open and tolerant, but we do not allow hate speech that incites violence. That is and always has been our position. Canada rejects the politics of division and fear. I will always be opposed.
YouthMs. Filomena Tassi (Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in February, the Prime Minister and Minister of Youth launched a national dialogue on developing a youth policy for Canada.
With his youth council here in Ottawa this week, could the Prime Minister update the House on the development of youth policy and on any other initiatives that the Prime Minister's Youth Council is undertaking?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas for her continued advocacy for youth. As we know, young Canadians are not just the leaders of tomorrow. They are the leaders today. 
The Prime Minister's Youth Council has played a crucial role in leading consultations across the country to help develop Canada's first-ever national youth policy. 
I would also like to welcome the youth council to Ottawa where they will tackle difficult issues this week, such as the opioid crisis, and discuss Canada's role on the world stage. As always, I look forward to their advice.
Immigration, Refugees and CitizenshipHon. Michelle Rempel (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister lifted the visa requirement on Romania knowing that high numbers of false asylum claims and incidents of organized crime would be a risk of doing so. Indeed, in the five months since making this ill-advised decision, well over 1,000 asylum claims have been filed and the CBSA has now said that the lifting of the visa requirement “has precipitated a noticeable increase of the activities of Romania-based Organized Crime groups...targeting Canada.”
Will the Prime Minister keep Canada safe and reinstate the visa requirement on Romania?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we continue to work with the Romanian government to ensure that our system works. We are in discussions with them right now to look at ways of ensuring that organized crime and others are not using and abusing Canada's immigration system. 
This is something that we take very seriously. I thank the member opposite for bringing forward this question and I am pleased to tell her that we are very much engaged exactly on this issue.
ScienceMr. Pierre-Luc Dusseault (Sherbrooke, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Mont-Mégantic observatory is vital to the development of scientific knowledge in Canada and throughout the world. Even so, the Liberals and their predecessors are content to wait until the last minute to approve funding for the observatory, and then only for a set period of time.
This approach is once again causing the observatory team and the scientific community a lot of anxiety, and yet the Liberals promised stable funding for the observatory.
Are we witnessing the breaking of yet another Liberal promise? Is the Prime Minister waiting for the observatory to close its doors before he takes action?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the fact that budget 2018 makes historic investments in science and research across the country. We understand how important it is to our well-being to invest in science, particularly after 10 years of Conservative neglect. We recognize the value of the Mont-Mégantic observatory's work. We will continue to work with the observatory team to make sure that everything goes smoothly in the future.
HealthFrancis Drouin: Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect to know that the food they are eating is safe, especially since the complex international food chain is creating some significant new challenges for food safety.
Our government has been taking firm action to address these issues to simultaneously make our food safer while also providing more trade opportunities for businesses.
Could the right hon. Prime Minister please update the House as to today's announcement of the safe food for Canadians regulations?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell for his hard work on behalf of Canadian farmers.
We announced the publication of the safe food for Canadians regulations, which will reduce the burden on businesses and grow market access for Canada's agricultural sector. We also implemented new measures to reduce the time it takes to remove unsafe food from the marketplace.
We are proud of those who work in our agricultural sector, and we encourage them to continue innovating and being world leaders.
International TradeMr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I would like to try to get the truth for people in the agriculture sector. 
The Prime Minister did not want to tell dairy producers yesterday whether he plans to make concessions to the Americans on supply management or not.
The Minister of Agriculture confirmed this morning that there is room for negotiation with the Americans on supply management. In the Prime Minister's fantasy world, saying one thing in the United States and another thing in Chicoutimi must seem reasonable.
The Prime Minister is going to Saguenay tomorrow.
 Will he tell the truth, specifically whether he has made any concessions to the Americans on supply management? 
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are committed to supporting our dairy producers, and that is exactly what I told them yesterday.
 Ours is the party that created supply management, and we will continue to defend it. That is what I told the President. The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Agriculture will continue to defend our dairy producers. 
As Canadians know, on this side of the House, all Liberal members continue to defend supply management and support our dairy industry.
CannabisMr. Rhéal Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, QD): Mr. Speaker, not only have the Liberals decided to legalize cannabis, but they have also decided that Quebec, the provinces, the Senate, the opposition, and everyone else should bend to their will. This is one heck of a power trip.
The National Assembly is not interested in letting every family, every household, grow four pot plants. Our elected representatives have spoken: we do not want that. Quebec wants to do this its own way in its own good time.
What part of that does the Prime Minister not understand?
Justin Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are regulating the sale of cannabis for one very simple reason: the current system is not protecting our young people or our communities.
Organized crime is pocketing billions of dollars per year from illegal cannabis sales, and we know the measures we have proposed in this bill will reduce the role of organized crime in the sale of cannabis. That is why we are doing what we are doing. We want to protect young people and all Canadians.
Presence in GalleryThe Speaker: I would like to draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of the Honourable Rabindra Prasad Adhikari, Minister for Culture, Tourism, and Civil Aviation of Nepal.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Hear, hear!
Michelle Rempel:  Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been consultations and if you seek it, I hope you will find unanimous support for the following motion: That the House call on the government to increase the ratio of highly persecuted LGBT refugees that Canada welcomes as part of its humanitarian immigration streams, particularly from countries where they face extreme persecution such as Iran; and make the Rainbow refugee assistance program a regular ongoing program with multi-year funding.
The Speaker: Does the hon. member have unanimous consent of the House to propose the motion?
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Agreed. 
 No. 
Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Prime Minister why his party voted against that motion.
The Speaker: I think the member knows the answer. 
Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for me to table the following document by Charles Lamman and Hugh MacIntyre, the co-authors of a Fraser Institute study, entitled, “Measuring the Impact of Federal Personal Income Tax Changes—
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  No.
The Speaker: It appears there is no unanimous consent.
Order, please. The hon. member for Carleton has another point of order.
Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, the members did not get a chance to hear this. It says, “Yes, most middle-class families are paying more in income taxes” today.

Private Members' Business
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from June 7 consideration of Bill S-210, An Act to amend An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Civil Marriage Act and the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, as reported (without amendment) from the committee.
The Speaker: It being 3:14 p.m., pursuant to order made on Tuesday, May 29, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at report stage of Bill S-210 under private members' business.
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:) 
Vote #755
The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Visitability[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from June 11 consideration of the motion.
The Speaker: Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, May 29, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on Motion No. 157 under private members' business, standing in the name of the member for Tobique—Mactaquac.
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
Vote #756
The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Government Orders
Business of Supply[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from June 12 consideration of the motion.
The Speaker: Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, June 12, 2018, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion relating to the business of supply.
[Stage Direction]
[Before the Clerk announced the results of the vote:]
Mr. Nicola Di Iorio: Mr. Speaker, in light of the speech I made yesterday, and considering that I might be missing a few votes during the 500 days that separate us from the general election, I may have gotten a bit too excited and I may have voted twice. I want to thank my colleagues in the opposition for having alerted me, as I was not paying attention when it was time to vote. Therefore, I want my vote to be registered as opposed.
The Speaker: I thank the member for the clarification.
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)
Vote #757
The Speaker: I declare the motion lost.

Private Members' Business
Department of Public Works and Government Services Act[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from June 13 consideration of the motion that Bill C-344, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (community benefit), be read the third time and passed.
The Speaker: The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the third reading stage of Bill C-344 under private members' business.
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
Vote #758
The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Government Orders
Fisheries Act[Stage Direction]
 The House resumed from June 12 consideration of Bill C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence, as reported (with amendment) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1. 
The Speaker: Pursuant to an order made on Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at report stage of Bill C-68.
The question is on Motion No. 1. A vote on this motion also applies to Motions Nos. 2 to 59.
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on Motion No. 1, which was negatived on the following division:)
Vote #759
The Speaker: I declare Motion No. 1 defeated and I therefore declare Motions Nos. 2 to 59 defeated.
Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, Lib.):  moved that the bill, as amended, be concurred in at report stage.
The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Agreed.
 No.
The Speaker:  All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Yea.
The Speaker:  All those opposed will please say nay.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Nay.
The Speaker:  In my opinion the yeas have it.
 And five or more members having risen:  
[Stage Direction]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:) 
Vote #760
The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Routine Proceedings
Government Response to PetitionsMr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 15 petitions.
While I am on my feet, I move:
 That the House do now proceed to orders of the day. 

The Speaker: The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Agreed.
 On division.
The Speaker: (Motion agreed to)

Government Orders
Cannabis ActHon. Ginette Petitpas Taylor:  moved:
 That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-45, An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts, the House: 
 agrees with amendments 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11(b) and (c), 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17(b), 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 34, 35, 36 and 37 made by the Senate; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 3 because the government has been clear that provinces and territories are able to make additional restrictions on personal cultivation but that it is critically important to permit personal cultivation in order to support the government’s objective of displacing the illegal market; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendments 4, 11(a) and 38 because they would be contrary to the stated purpose of the Cannabis Act to protect the health of young persons by restricting their access to cannabis; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 7 because the criminal penalties and the immigration consequences aim to prevent young people from accessing cannabis and to deter criminal activity by imposing serious criminal penalties for prohibited activities, including importing and exporting cannabis and using a young person to commit cannabis-related offences; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 8 because the Cannabis Act already includes comprehensive restrictions on promotion; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 9 because the government has already committed to establishing THC limits in regulations, which will provide flexibility to make future adjustments based on new evidence and product innovation; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendments 17(a) and 25 because other Senate amendments that the House is accepting would provide the Minister with expanded powers to require security clearances, and because amendments 17(a) and 25 would present significant operational challenges and privacy concerns; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 23 because law enforcement has an obligation to maintain evidence unless there is a risk to health and safety, and provisions currently exist in the Cannabis Act to provide compensation should evidence be disposed of and ordered to be returned; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 26 because mechanisms already exist to provide for public scrutiny of federal regulations; 
 proposes that amendment 31 be amended by replacing the text of section 151.1 with the following text: 
 “151.1 (1) Three years after this section comes into force, the Minister must cause a review of this Act and its administration and operation to be conducted, including a review of the impact of this Act on public health and, in particular, on the health and consumption habits of young persons in respect of cannabis use, the impact of cannabis on Indigenous persons and communities, and the impact of the cultivation of cannabis plants in a dwelling-house. 
 (2) No later than 18 months after the day on which the review begins, the Minister must cause a report on the review, including any findings or recommendations resulting from it, to be laid before each House of Parliament.”; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 32 because the Bill already provides for a comprehensive review of the core objectives of the Cannabis Act, including a requirement to table a report in Parliament and because the suggested amendment to amendment 31 provides for a review of the public health impacts of the Cannabis Act; 
 respectfully disagrees with amendment 33 because Parliament already has broad discretion to initiate studies of specific matters by parliamentary committees, and because the Bill already provides for a comprehensive review of the Cannabis Act, including a requirement to table a report in Parliament. 
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here today and to rise to speak to Bill C-45, Cannabis Act. I would first congratulate the other chamber for its excellent work and careful study of this bill. Once again, I want to point out the great work done by all senators over the past seven months and by committees that did remarkable work over many meetings.
We are about to witness an historic moment in Canada. When this bill comes into effect, it will change the way our country controls access to cannabis.
It will be an important change for every one of us, including governments, indigenous peoples, law enforcement agencies, health professionals, and Canadians.
As I have said many times, our objective for legalization is to replace a system that is not working. We need to keep cannabis out of the hands of youth and profits out of the hands of organized crime. 
Bill C-45 gives us the tools we need to accomplish that.
 As we know, the bill before us today is the result of more than two years of study and consultation.
It builds on the extensive work of the task force on cannabis legalization and regulation. The task force consulted with a wide range of stakeholders, from the provinces and territories, to law enforcement, to health and safety experts. It also reached out to young Canadians, indigenous people, and many others. Their feedback and recommendations certainly helped shape this bill.
The proposed legislation is informed by lessons learned from jurisdictions in the United States and elsewhere that have legalized and regulated cannabis. It included effective practices from other regulatory regimes such as tobacco, for which we have implemented a public health approach with demonstrated success.
As a result, the proposed legalization strikes the right balance between making cannabis legally available to adults and protecting all Canadians.
Over the past few months, this bill has been studied and debated by the other place. Five of its committees carried out comprehensive studies and heard from over 200 witnesses. This work led them to propose a number of amendments to the bill. Several of those amendments made Bill C-45 stronger.
For example, senators had proposed an amendment that would strengthen our ability to keep organized crime out of the legal industry by giving the minister the power to require specific persons associated with a licensed organization to hold a valid security clearance. There is no doubt that this change improves Bill C-45 and the government will fully support it.
We are, however, concerned that other proposed changes could undermine the bill. After careful thought and consideration, we have decided not to support some of the proposed amendments. My colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, will speak in more detail about this decision.
In the meantime, I would like to focus on two specific issues that have captured the interest of the other place. Let us talk about the indigenous perspective. 
The first concerns the indigenous perspective on Bill C-45. In a recent letter, the Minister of Indigenous Services and I acknowledged the interests and concerns raised by the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. We have committed to continue to take action in specific areas including supporting mental health and addiction services, public education and participation in cannabis production, and addressing jurisdictional and revenue-sharing issues.
We have committed to report to both chambers on progress in these areas within 12 months of receiving royal assent. I would like to assure members that our government has noted these areas of interest and concern. We will address each area through continued engagement with indigenous communities, indigenous organizations, and with the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples.
Home growing was the other issue that received careful consideration from the other place. As we know, the bill allows adults to grow four plants per household. There are three reasons why limited home growing should be allowed.
 First, allowing people to grow a small number of plants for personal use will prevent the needless criminalization of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Second, limited home growing will help displace the black market, an unsafe, unregulated market that supports criminals and organized crime.
The bill sets out strict rules for growing cannabis at home. Setting a very low limit on the number of plants is a reasonable way to allow adults to cultivate cannabis for their personal use while prohibiting larger-scale grow ops.
Under the proposed legislation, provinces and territories have the flexibility to impose additional restrictions on personal cultivation should they wish to do so. This flexibility will allow provinces and territories to tailor their legislation to local circumstances and priorities in keeping with the public health and safety objectives set out in the proposed cannabis act.
This new legislation is an essential component of our overall public health strategy for cannabis. The purpose of this approach is to minimize the harms associated with cannabis use and decrease the probability of substance abuse. Our public health approach includes significant investments in budget 2017 and budget 2018 for promoting awareness and providing information. It also provides for close monitoring of the impact.
In accordance with this strategy, we will provide the facts on cannabis to Canadians. The government will then be able to measure and understand the impact of these policy changes over time.
We know that there are health risks associated with cannabis use. These risks are higher in certain age groups and among people with specific health conditions. Our objective is both to give people the information they need to make informed decisions about cannabis and to minimize the risks.
Through all of this, our top priority is to protect our youth. Youth face the greatest health risks from using cannabis and are especially vulnerable to its effects. For this reason, the bill contains many measures that have been designed to restrict access to cannabis and to protect young people. This is essential, given that Canadian youth use cannabis at a rate that is among the highest in the world. This is why Bill C-45 proposes serious criminal penalties for those who provide cannabis to anyone under the age of 18. 
The bill also includes prohibitions on promotion and advertising and on products, packaging, and labelling that would be appealing to youth.
 The bill introduced today was carefully crafted to address the long-standing problem of immediate access to and prolonged use of cannabis in Canada. There is a pervasive illegal market that is deeply entrenched. This market does not comply with any rules or regulations to protect the public, and especially our youth.
We promised a solution to Canadians, and we have kept our promise. Over the past two years, our government carried out a huge amount of research, analysis, and planning for Bill C-45. We consulted various stakeholders and we spoke with our partners.
We made strategic investments to inform Canadians about the health impacts of cannabis and the risks associated with driving under the influence of drugs.
We also examined and accepted a number of sensible amendments, and we will do so again today.
I am convinced that Bill C-45 gives us the legal framework we need to protect Canadians, especially our young people.
Canada is well positioned to make this change. We already have a world-class system for the production and regulation of cannabis for medical use. The bill proposes to build on this strong regulatory regime. 
We will continue working closely with our partners at the provincial and territorial level and indigenous communities to ensure a successful implementation of this legislation once it is passed.
The provinces and territories are ready. Canadians are ready as well.
As parliamentarians, we have done our job and produced an historic package of legislative measures in the interest of Canadians.
Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC): Madam Speaker, the minister is clearly not in possession of the facts. Although she claims that this new bill is going to work to eliminate marijuana from the hands of children, it is clear that is not going to happen and neither will it eliminate organized crime. 
Washington State did not allow home grow and organized crime was eliminated. The minister has gone on record saying that what the government is implementing will accomplish that, when clearly in Colorado, that allowed home grow, that did not happen.
Knowing that four plants in a house can be 600 grams, and that was before the height restriction was removed, there will be a huge amount. Provinces like Manitoba and Quebec have recognized that that will not keep it out of the hands of children. The minister's own province of New Brunswick put in lock-up provisions recognizing it does not.
With that, why did the minister allow home grow to be included in this legislation?
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, once again we have to make it very clear that our objective in moving forward with Bill C-45 is simple. We are moving forward with legalization as we want to restrict access to cannabis by our youth. We want to protect our youth. We also want to regulate the product that is on the market.
With respect to the issue of home grow, we have to recognize that if we want to displace the illegal market, we have to use all the tools that we have at our disposal. 
We recognize as well that when individuals have a prescription to grow cannabis for medical purposes, they have the opportunity to grow that product at home. When we talk about recreational cannabis, we feel that both systems should be consistent.
I also have to add that for all provinces and territories, should they choose to add additional limits with respect to home cultivation, they will be able to do so. If a province chooses to only allow one plant to be grown, it can absolutely do that.
As my friend and colleague indicated, the province of New Brunswick, my home province, has even put a specific requirement forward. It wants to ensure that if New Brunswickers choose home cultivation they will have to do so under lock and key.
Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): Madam Speaker, I recognize that for both ministers this is a very difficult bill. Overall, I certainly support Bill C-45. In general, it strikes the right balance. However, I am disappointed that some of the Senate amendments have been rejected, and I wonder if the minister would reconsider.
 I tried similar amendments when the bill was before committee. The ones I could generally lump together are clause 9, pages 10 and 11; and another one further in, clause 51, pages 29 to 31, dealing with what we might characterize as social sharing. I am very concerned that young people will not realize that if they are 18 years old and their best friend is 17 years, 11 months, and two weeks old, passing a joint to this friend in a social setting would constitute distribution and could even involve jail time. 
I think we ought to look at these amendments that came from the Senate. Again, I think that the government has done a pretty fair job here. I have a lot of concern on regulations, which I will raise later. I am very concerned to make sure that legal growing outdoors of organic cannabis would be permitted. However, for now, looking at these amendments, I wonder if there might be some reconsideration around this particular area of concern.
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, as I have indicated earlier, very clearly, the Senate has certainly been studying this proposed legislation for the past seven months. We absolutely appreciate the work that it has done. We have given careful consideration to all of the amendments that the Senate has brought forward, and after discussions with my colleagues, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Public Safety, as well as many cabinet colleagues, and the parliamentary secretary, we have made the decision to accept some amendments and some we have decided to oppose. 
When it comes to the specific amendment that my friend and colleague has mentioned, we really felt that it was counterintuitive with respect to the sharing aspect at such a close age. It is an area that we have given close consideration to, but at this point, our government is not prepared to accept that amendment. 
Mr. Bernard Généreux (Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, CPC): Madam Speaker, just two days ago, the Government of Quebec adopted its own bill for the province, and it was extremely clear about the province's desire to be able to ban home cultivation.
The minister says that they talked about the bill throughout the entire two-year process and that the senators did good work. They did such good work that their 46 amendments speak to the mediocrity of this bill.
The reality is that the Government of Quebec does not want its citizens to be allowed to grow plants at home because it feels that it is not in the interest of young children.
Why will the minister not respect the will of the Province of Quebec?
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, once again, I want to thank my colleague for his question.
With regard to home cultivation, we obviously thought about this issue and also closely examined this amendment. We recognize that the Senate did a thorough job, and we studied all the recommendations made to date.
I do not agree with my colleague who called it a mediocre law. The task force on cannabis legalization and regulation did great work, and we have been working on this bill for two years. We are convinced that Bill C-45 is really good.
It was very important for the other chamber, the Senate, to review it and make recommendations. On this side of the House, we studied these recommendations very carefully and we accepted the majority of amendments. 
We do not hold the same position on home cultivation, but we nevertheless respect the work done by everyone.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Madam Speaker, it is a real pleasure to see the bill come back to this House with some of those recommendations. However, despite the fact that we hear rhetoric from the opposition around increased consumption among youth, the reality of the situation is that we know youth in Canada are at the high end of utilizing marijuana as it currently stands. 
I wonder if the minister could comment on those statistics and on what the bill seeks to accomplish in terms of reducing cannabis use among youth in Canada. 
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, the priority of Bill C-45, as we legalize cannabis, is to restrict cannabis and get it out of the hands of youth. We recognize that in Canada, in many instances, it is easier for our youth to purchase cannabis than it is for them to purchase cigarettes. We recognize that the current system is not working, and that is why we are moving forward with the bill. We want to legalize, restrict, and also regulate this substance.
We recognize that Canadian youth are among the highest consumers of cannabis among the developed countries. As a result, we are taking a public health approach. We are making some significant investments in the area of public education and awareness. We are also partnering with many agencies to make sure that we provide the appropriate tools to provide the public education and the awareness campaign that is needed to ensure that they get the proper information.
Ms. Rachel Blaney (North Island—Powell River, NDP): Madam Speaker, one of the concerns one of the members brought up earlier was about having two young people together, one who is of age and one who is very close but not quite there, and the criminal record they could get for making the mistake of passing a joint. I wonder if you could talk a bit about what your plans are to actually educate young people to make sure that we negate that as much as possible. 
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I just want to remind the member that she is to address the questions to the Chair. I am not going to answer that but will ask the minister to respond.
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, as I was indicating earlier with respect to the public education and awareness campaign, it is important to make sure that the appropriate investments are made to inform Canadians about Bill C-45 with respect to the coming into force date and all the information that needs to go with it. I also have to stress that the information and tools we are going to put in place with respect to public education and awareness are key. 
The public education campaigns have already started. They started last year, and we are continuing to roll out these products. We recognize that we have to get the key messages out to Canadians, because we want them to be able to make responsible choices. 
Ginette Petitpas Taylor: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am tabling a government response to Questions Nos. 1717 to 1728.
Marilyn Gladu: Madam Speaker, I would like to say that this will probably be my last opportunity to speak to Bill C-45, so I want to make sure I give it full coverage.
The government says that the reason it is bringing in this legislation is that what is in place now is not working. What is proposed under Bill C-45 is not going to work either, even with the many amendments that have been brought forward.
What was this bill supposed to do in the first place? If we refer to the purpose of the bill, it is supposed to “protect the health of young persons by restricting their access to cannabis”. We can see right away a couple of things in the bill that are going to put cannabis into the hands of young children. First is clause 8, which would allow young people aged 12 to 17 to have up to five grams of cannabis. That is the wrong message in any universe.
We have talked about home grow and how when people have in excess of 600 grams of cannabis growing in a house, young people are likely to get hold of it, in the same way they get hold of liquor in the liquor cabinet. This is certainly not going to keep cannabis out of the hands of young children. 
Furthermore, I would say that if the government has a belief that the systems being put in place in some provinces are going to help out, let me assure the House that Kathleen Wynne put in a process in Ontario of LCBO-type stores and delivery. For people in Sarnia—Lambton, the closest store is in London. If they called their drug dealers today, in about 30 minutes they could have whatever quantity they wanted delivered to their houses for about $7 a gram. The government has proposed a price of $10 a gram, with $1 in tax on top of that. If it thinks that is going to work to displace the organized crime that is in place, it is sadly mistaken.
The other item I want to talk about with respect to youth is the public education that was supposed to happen. The Canadian Medical Association has been clear that among young people under the age of 25 who use cannabis, 30% will have severe mental illness issues, such as psychotic disorders, bipolar, anxiety, and depression, and 10% will become addicted. Where is the public education on that? Where is the message to tell young people today that this is harmful? That message is not out there. Young people are saying, “It's no more harmful than alcohol.” They are not getting the message.
The only public campaign that has been done was done by the Minister of Public Safety, who did a brief TV commercial to let kids know that they should not drive while they are drug-impaired, which, while true, is totally inadequate to have the kind of public education that was recommended by Colorado and the State of Washington. Colorado did $10 million worth of public education for a population that is lot smaller than what Canada has. The State of Washington did the same.
We are certainly not going to achieve the first objective of keeping it out of the hands of children. What about some of the others? Will we provide for only the legal production of cannabis “to reduce illicit activities in relation to cannabis”? If we look at all the places that have legalized marijuana, we see that in Colorado, which allowed home grow, it still has significant issues with organized crime. The police have a lot of nuisance complaints, and there are entire residential neighbourhoods that smell. There are lots of problems there. 
We can look at the State of Washington, which decided that it would not allow home grow, except in the case of medicinal marijuana. It was able, in three years, to reduce organized crime to less than 20%. Because it had set the age at 21, it was able to make it difficult for young people to actually get hold of marijuana. It is unlikely that 21-year-olds would be sharing with 17-year-olds, unlike with the legislation we have before us.
Another problem that has not been addressed by the government with respect to home grow concerns property-owner rights. In Ontario and Quebec, once this legislation is passed, property owners would be unable to prevent people from growing marijuana in their houses. For those who are maybe less experienced, when growing marijuana, there can often be a mould problem in the house. I have been approached by the real estate associations, which have asked questions. Currently, when there is a home grow in a house, and the house is sold, they have to do a total remediation for the mould and a recertification of the house. They want to know if they are going to have to do that for all the home grows. That question has not been answered by the government.
The other question that has not been answered by the government has to do with the impact at the border. I live in a border community. Conversations have been had with Homeland Security and with border officials. They have said, “Canada is changing its law. We are not changing our law federally. It still is illegal federally, and we are not adding resources because of Canada's law.” Dogs will sniff. If people have second-hand smoke residue on their clothes, if a kid borrowed the car and happened to be out with other kids who were smoking marijuana, if people smoke themselves and do not happen to have any with them but have the residue, the dogs will sniff it out, and people will be pulled over into secondary, and they will go through the standard procedure there. The problem is that there is not enough secondary for the number of people who will be pulled over. When asked what they will do then, they said they would put a cone in the lane the person is in and perform the secondary inspection there, which will back everything up. They have informed us to expect an increase of up to 300% in wait times at the border. 
The government has known about this for two and a half years. It has done nothing to establish any kind of agreement with the government of the U.S., other than to say to make sure that people tell the truth. That, of course, is great advice, but it will not prevent the wait times and the problems that are going to be seen at the border. 
Furthermore, the government has not educated young people to understand that if they are caught with marijuana in the U.S., it is a lifetime ban from that country. The U.S. is not the only country that will ban people for the possession of marijuana. There are a lot of countries in the world. Young people who intend to have a global career are not being informed about this, and there could be very adverse consequences from the public education that has not happened.
This bill was also supposed to “reduce the burden on the criminal justice system”. Unfortunately, we know that the justice minister is behind the eight ball in terms of putting judges in place. She is about 60 short. Because of that, we see murderers and rapists going free due to Jordan's principle. If there were an intent on the part of the Liberals to try to clear the backlog and make sure that those who have committed more serious crimes receive punishment, one of the things they could have done, as was suggested many times, even since last September, was let those who have marijuana charges drop off the list and get out of the queue so that the more serious offences could be prosecuted. Of course, the Liberals have done nothing with respect to that, and so again, they are not going to actually offload them from the system. In fact, there would be more criminal charges under this legislation than previously existed, because now, if people had five plants instead of four, that would be an offence. Now, if they had 31 grams instead of 30, that would be an offence. Now there would be offences for transferring it to younger people. There would be a lot of offences that did not exist previously, so definitely, we will not achieve that goal.
There was the goal to ”provide access to a quality-controlled supply of cannabis”. Now that they would allow home grow, and everyone is going to be doing their own thing, there would actually be no management of the quality control of this product. That is also not acceptable.
 Some of the other unanswered questions we see have to do with workplace safety. This was raised when the marijuana issue was studied by the original council. There was testimony brought to committee. There were questions raised all over the place. How are we going to protect the employers, who have the liability, and the other employees, who are worried? They are worried about people who may come to work drug impaired. We do not want to be flying with Air Canada and have the pilot impaired. We do not want to have people operating nuclear plants who may be drug impaired. 
 Bill C-46 was supposed to be the companion legislation to Bill C-45. Bill C-46 was going to allow mandatory and random testing on the roadside, because, as people know, it is dangerous to smoke drugs and then drive a car. That was going to open the door, then, for people to say that if it is dangerous to smoke drugs and drive a car, perhaps it is also dangerous to then drive a plane or drive a train or operate a nuclear plant, or any of these other things. The question of workplace safety and how we are going to protect and what legislation is going into place is a total blank space. 
We have not looked to our neighbours to the south that have legalized and have both mandatory and random testing in place. I worked on many projects, and I actually had an office in the States at one point in time, so I know that American employers are able to screen people before they hire them. They are able to mandatory test them, and they are able to random test them. The government has totally lacked leadership in addressing the issue of workplace safety, etc.
With respect to the actual amendments that have come, some were good and some were not good. One amendment that was brought would allow 18-year-olds to share their marijuana or allow parents in a home to share their marijuana. I am glad the government decided not to accept that one.
I am still concerned about the fact that there is even marijuana in the house. However, if that amendment was accepted it definitely would not have not been keeping marijuana out of the hands of young children. 
One of the amendments that they did not accept had to do with the banning of promotional things like T-shirts, caps, and flags that would have a cannabis symbol on them. The government did not accept this amendment from the Senate. I am very concerned about that. 
There are a lot of Canadians out there who are worried that when marijuana is legalized in Canada they are going to use Canada Day flags that have cannabis on them. Everybody will have a T-shirt with cannabis on it. That will be disgusting. It will absolutely denigrate our country and the people who have served our country and made Canada a proud country. It will deface that. The government has allowed people to continue to have that kind of paraphernalia by refusing the language here. It is total hypocrisy because under Bill S-228, which talks about prohibiting unhealthy advertising to children, we would not want to see pop or something like that on a T-shirt or a flag. However, with cannabis, it is okay. I am totally opposed to that.
Another thing that the government should have taken into account was the amendment that was brought on capping the potency of THC. We have heard reports from all over Canada, as people are increasingly trying marijuana for the first time or experiencing B.C. bud, which purportedly has one of the highest THC contents and a lot of potency, that people are presenting at the emergency wards with uncontrollable vomiting due to THC poisoning. Knowing that a part of the intent of this bill is to protect the health of Canadians and of youth, I cannot understand why the government would not recognize that there needs to be some control on the potency of things that are out in the marketplace.
Some of the amendments were compassionate and talked about giving people more time to pay their fines. I thought that was good that the government accepted those. I also thought it was good that they would, for young people, ages 12 to 17, who were experiencing an offence, look at ticketed offences, which is something that we would have supported, and restorative justice options. 
If we look to countries that are doing the best job of intervening and helping people to get off drugs, look to Portugal. If anyone is found in possession of drugs there, they are given an intervention with a medical person, a psychiatrist, and a legal person. They then try to figure out what the root cause is of why these people are self-medicating or why are they becoming addicted, and what can be done to help get them off of it, in terms of mental health therapies or drug addiction therapies, etc. We need to look at this whole thing.
The other part that I think is unfortunate is that the indigenous people have not been adequately consulted. I was very disappointed to find that in September of last year, when we first heard at committee from Chief Day and from the Métis nation, they said they had not been adequately consulted. It is disheartening to hear that again when this went before the Senate, the same message came out that they had not been adequately consulted, and that they wanted to have the ability within their own communities to define whether or not cannabis would be allowed. Apparently under federal law, it was clarified to them that if it is a federal right of Canadians to possess cannabis, then it is not something that they would be able to go against. There was some resistance about that based on the sovereignty of the indigenous peoples. I think that was not resolved to their satisfaction. 
It is worrisome that the government continues to rush ahead. It says that this is the most important relationship, the nation-to-nation relationship, yet it is willing to go and throw gasoline on a fire in terms of moving ahead when it has been asked not to do so.
Some of the other questions that arose at committee that really have not been adequately answered have to do with a lot of the detailed specifics about who is going to pay. Municipalities are saying there will be a cost to them to implement it, but they have not been included in the cost breakdown or the agreements that have happened. That is of concern. There have also been concerns raised by people who currently are consuming medical marijuana, and their understanding is that they are going to be paying tax on that.
Typically, in Canada, prescription medicines are not taxed. Therefore, as long as people have a prescription from a doctor for their medicinal marijuana, my expectation would be that it would not be taxed. However, that is not what the government is saying. Also, there is language in the budget bill that is a little suspicious, which states it would exempt people from paying tax on medicinal marijuana that has a drug identification number. The problem with that is that there are no medications that have a drug identification number because there are so many different components in marijuana that the companies have not been able to spend the research dollars required to characterize them or to effectively control the quality of them so that they could acquire a number like that. Therefore, that is a meaningless promise, for sure.
There were some amendments that were brought to bring this legislation in line with the tobacco legislation. I am in favour of having those things aligned. However, it seems unusual that the government would be spending $80 million to get people to stop smoking and then $800 million to get people to start smoking marijuana, especially when the Minister of Health just stood up and talked about how the government knows there are harmful effects.
One of the things I find very interesting, from a timing point of view, is that today Health Canada took the harmful impacts of cannabis off of its website. That was something that had been on the website. I had someone that brought it to my notice, and sent me a screenshot of what used to be there and a screenshot of what is not there now. It is very interesting that on the day that the Liberals want to see this legislation pass into law, it would suddenly take off of the website the information that shows there are harmful effects from cannabis not only to young people but also others.
Therefore, I would request that the government not hide things. Rather, it should try to be open and transparent, as it says it is always trying to be, and put that information back on the website. Every place that has legalized marijuana has said that one of the most important things to do is to invest in public education, and target that education not just to young people so that they understand the harmful effects this would have on their brains, but also to adults and parents who can influence young people, and the general public so that they can understand as well.
 I am very concerned about some of the unintended consequences that will happen as a result of this legislation. I know there are people already smoking marijuana in Canada today. However, when it becomes legal, there will be many more who will decide to try it. They may not be informed about what the impact will be when they cross the border or what the impacts might be on their mental health or that of their children. They may not understand what the health impacts will be for them. They may not understand the ramifications with respect to their place of work and how they are going to impact both their employer and those who work around them.
That said, I am very opposed to the legalization of marijuana, which I have said on many occasions, not just because it is bad for people but because this bill has so many holes in it and so many unanswered questions, and there will be so many bad, unintended consequences for Canadians, that it will be left to the Conservative Party, when we come to victory in 2019, to clean up the mess made by the current government's moving forward in this rushed and irresponsible fashion to implement this bill. 
This bill will absolutely not keep marijuana out of the hands of young children. It will not get organized crime out of this business. It will not unload our criminal justice system. It certainly will not provide access to a quality-controlled supply. 
What we can expect is that on Canada Day there will be a lot of people out with their T-shirts on, totally insulting those Canadians who are proud of our country and who are not in agreement, and there are a lot of Canadians who are not in agreement with this legislation.
Mr. Bill Blair (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and to the Minister of Health, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the member opposite for her remarks and for her hard work on the health committee. Her opinions are always valued.
One thing that is clear, and that I have found there is an overwhelming consensus for right across the country, is that the current system of criminal prohibition is failing our communities and our kids terribly. We have the highest rates of cannabis use among children in the world. The entire production and distribution system of cannabis today in Canada is controlled by criminals. The products that our kids are exposed to are untested, unregulated, and unsafe. With respect to prohibition, I think there is a general acknowledgement that it simply does not work. 
It is only by lifting that prohibition and replacing it with a comprehensive system of regulation for its production, distribution, and consumption that we have any opportunity to bring some control to a situation that is clearly out of control and damaging our communities and enriching criminals.
Therefore, I ask the member opposite what her intention would be. The next time your party may come into government, would you recriminalize this and reinstitute the prohibition after we have lifted it?
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I want to remind the parliamentary secretary to address his questions to the Chair.
The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.
Marilyn Gladu: Madam Speaker, the member opposite is absolutely right that the situation today is not a good situation, but if Liberals had done what was prudent, they would have put in place a system like Washington state that actually reduced organized crime's involvement, raised the age to 21, and made it more difficult for people to get hold of marijuana.
In terms of what will happen in the future, I look forward to the day in 2019 when Conservatives are victorious and return to government. At that time, it will be like the toothpaste is out of the tube. There will be a big mess to clean up and a doubling of traffic deaths, which has been seen in every other jurisdiction. Public education has not been done by the government, after warnings from every jurisdiction that legalized marijuana. That is going to have to happen for people to understand the harms. However, by that time, there will be young people who have mental health issues, there will be traffic deaths, and all of the unintended consequences to property owners.
Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP): Madam Speaker, I first want to express what a pleasure it is to work with my hon. colleague on the health committee. She almost puts a reasonable gloss on the Conservative position on cannabis, and for that I congratulate her.
The position of the Conservative Party on cannabis has been extremely perplexing to me. In the comments of the hon. member for Thornhill, he compared a homegrown cannabis plant to the equivalent of leaving opioids out for children. Right now in Canada, the reality is that with extreme criminalization, in fact, a potential life sentence for trafficking, we have the second highest rate of cannabis use among young people in the world.
Given that reality and given that millions of Canadians who have used and currently use cannabis do not feel it is a criminal act, and given that her party is opposed to legalization, I have a question for her on the edibles and concentrates provision. This bill would continue to make edibles and concentrates illegal in Canada. Given that one of the purposes of the bill is to get rid of the black market, I wonder what her party's position is on the legalization of edibles and concentrates. Is she and her party content to leave those products in the hands of organized crime, which is selling those products, in some cases, without any of the regulations that Canadians want to see with those products?
Marilyn Gladu: Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to work with the member as well on the health committee. He brings forward many good points.
Here are some of the facts that come to bear on this question: 30% of the market today is edibles. We received testimony from multiple jurisdictions that had legalized edibles, and they talked about some of the problems they encountered originally with overdoses in children, especially with gummy bear and candy-flavoured items. Having very strict controls and learning lessons from those people will be important, but once again, the government decided not to have parliamentary oversight when those regulations are developed. The bureaucrats will be able to put in place whatever they want. Perhaps they will not listen to the learnings of other jurisdictions, and I am against that.
Mr. Kevin Waugh (Saskatoon—Grasswood, CPC): Madam Speaker, I have a couple of items.
I want to thank the member for Sarnia—Lambton for talking about the education system. We have seen a few ads by the government on television, but not enough. It was prepared to spend $300,000, $400,000, or $500,000 for an ad campaign and we have not seen that, even though we could be months, or even weeks, away from this bill becoming law.
In January, I went to Nunavut. There are no addiction centres at all up north. They are concerned. There is not one addiction centre in Nunavut, yet the government has not consulted with them. They are concerned about this because their people from the north have to go to Winnipeg and even Montreal to addiction centres. There is no plan by the Liberal government to place addiction centres up north. I would ask the member to talk about the addiction centres that will certainly be needed when this bill becomes law.
Marilyn Gladu: Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question. Yes, the government has been woefully inadequate in putting treatment facilities in place, not just in Nunavut but across the country. If we compare it with other places that do this well, talking about public education and treatment, Colorado spent $10 million on public education and it has five million people. Washington state spent $7 million and it has seven million people, and it spent it a year before the legalization. The $100,000 we are talking about for 36 million people is woefully inadequate.
Let us take Portugal. The government is always saying how well Portugal does things. Portugal has 170 treatment centres for 11 million people in a very small, driveable space. That is not the situation in Canada, and we have to start putting emphasis on treatment for people, especially those who are predisposed. Nunavut has recognized the threat and decided not to allow homegrown cannabis, along with Quebec and Manitoba, and treatment centres are needed there as well.
Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I have been following the Conservatives' debate on this issue, and I find it amazing. Their position is to decriminalize cannabis. By decriminalizing cannabis but not legalizing it and putting in regulations, I suspect they will find great support from gangs. Gangs and the criminal element would be the biggest beneficiaries of the Conservative policy on this issue. If we decriminalize cannabis, that means that the gangs can continue to get involved. After all, it is not legal, but now these individuals would not go to jail. Rather, they would get a fine. It just does not make any sense.
Where I believe we agree is that over the last decade we have seen our youth more engaged in cannabis than the youth in any other western country in terms of the crisis that currently exists. This legislation would legalize, regulate, and educate. I believe there would be marginal criminal activities surrounding it. Those monies would be generated for government. I see it as a win-win-win. The biggest winners would be our young people because there would be more education and it would decrease the number of young people participating in cannabis.
Marilyn Gladu: Madam Speaker, instead of talking about hypotheticals, let us talk about what organized crime is thinking about the government's legislation. They are jumping up and down. Their going price is $7 a gram, but the government is going to start at $10 a gram and then add another dollar. Not only that, the government is going to do what Colorado did and allow home grow. We can see how profitable organized crime has been there. By the way, the government also eliminated the visa requirements for people coming in from Mexico, so lots of experienced people could just move in and take over the whole thing. When we think about the advantages for organized crime, and how the police have already said that there is not enough of them to enforce all the provisions for home grow in this legislation, organized crime is going to be happy. It is going to make a huge amount of money when people have to go through Kathleen Wynne's LCBO model between nine and six.
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, as I tuned in to listen to the Senate debate on the cannabis bill, Bill C-45, I was given a stark reminder of why so many Canadians have so little confidence in that unelected, unaccountable body. Certainly it is legitimately questionable whether an institution capable of producing such baseless fearmongering and ignorance has any legitimacy blocking legislation passed by an overwhelming majority in this democratically elected House of Commons. 
Disturbingly, in the hours leading up to the final vote on Bill C-45, the Liberal government was forced to quietly swear in two new senators to ensure its passage, even though they were not present for one minute of testimony, one minute of debate, or one minute of review of the bill. However, they cast their vote in lockstep with the government. Some democracy. Some sober second thought.
After studying this legislation for over six months, it is not even clear that all 93 senators actually understood the most basic facts about cannabis, such as the most basic facts about cannabis quantity. While reviewing the act, Senator Nicole Eaton, a Conservative from Ontario, said this: 
 [F]ive grams is about four tokes. So, in other words, if I’m a high school student—I’m 16—I have four tokes in my pocket, which is under five grams. So you just don’t take it away from me, but I’m allowed to possess it, right?... I’m allowed to have less than five grams, or I’m allowed to have zero grams? This is what I don’t understand. 
There is quite a bit the senator does not understand. For the record, five grams of cannabis is enough for some 10 joints. That is far more than four tokes.
Given this statement, l was rather surprised to learn that both Senator Eaton and Senator Frum were forced to abstain from votes on the cannabis bill because they stand to profit from legalization. Senator Eaton declared a conflict of interest over the bill “due to an impending investment in the cannabis industry.” However, until she recused herself, Senator Eaton was an active participant in debates and committee work on legalization, including voting against Bill C-45 at second reading.
For her part, Senator Frum has a property “that will be leased for the purposes of selling recreational cannabis”. After initially indicating her opposition to Bill C-45, she recused herself from debate, deliberation, and voting on the matter.
While it may seem like a contradiction to publicly oppose Bill C-45 while privately investing in cannabis, such behaviour has become disturbingly common in the lead-up to legalization. An emerging group of so-called cannabis capitalists, notably composed of the same police officers and government officials who have spent years prosecuting the war on drugs, has already begun staking its claim to the new recreational market.
Some prominent names include the following. 
Kim Derry, who served as deputy chief when the current Liberal member for Scarborough Southwest, the Liberals' point man on cannabis, was Toronto police chief, is now the security adviser for THC Meds Ontario.
Former Ontario Liberal deputy premier, George Smitherman, who once served as the province's health minister, is tied to THC Meds Ontario as well.
Former Liberal prime minister John Turner is a board member for Muileboom Organics, Inc.
 Chuck Rifici founded Tweed Marijuana Inc., the country's first licensed provider to go public, while he was chief financial officer of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Former police chief and Conservative cabinet minister Julian Fantino, who once compared cannabis to murder and voted in favour of harsh mandatory minimum sentences for cannabis as a member of the Harper cabinet, has now gone into the cannabis business himself with former RCMP deputy commissioner Raf Souccar.
It is a travesty of justice and a hypocrisy of the highest order that those who fought hardest for legalization may benefit the least from it, while those who spent a lifetime enforcing prohibition are now lining up to fill the boardrooms of the cannabis industry.
Those who put their liberty on the line as activists for legalization, and who, in the pursuit of their defence of cannabis, often took legal liability and got criminal records, not for any violent activity but in their drive to get sensible cannabis policy in this country, now carry the burden of a criminal record for their efforts. Not only have they been shut out, but the federal government has not even offered them a path to participate in the cannabis industry, or to obtain pardons. Are they now supposed to sit back in admiration of the moral flexibility and business acumen of their former detractors?
The inescapable truth is that Bill C-45 is principally about legalizing the cannabis industry, not the plant or its usage. This bill is not about legalization, but about making cannabis less illegal. If this legislation were truly about legalizing the cannabis plant, it would herald the end of criminalization, the end of stigmatization, and the end of the prohibitionist approach to cannabis policy that has been such a failure for almost 100 years. Instead, this legislation would create an incredibly complex criminal framework that legal experts and police chiefs predict will result in more, not fewer, cannabis offences post-legalization.
There have been many opportunities to change course as Bill C-45 worked its way through Parliament. I want to be clear. I do give the government credit for rejecting the most harmful amendments proposed by the Senate, and for accepting the NDP's proposals in a number of ways, including to legalize the sale of edibles and concentrates, albeit not for one year post-legalization. This is unjustified, but it is the best the Liberals would do. The government has also agreed to remove the misguided 100-centimetre plant height limit. Unfortunately, the Liberals have also rejected a number of key improvements to Bill C-45.
I would like to take a moment to focus on some of the Senate's key proposed amendments and the government's response to them.
First is home growing. Based on the advice of the task force on cannabis legalization and regulation, the federal government has proposed to allow the personal cultivation of cannabis for non-medical purposes, with a limit of four plants per household. However, after considering a proposal to ban home growing outright, the Senate chose to amend Bill C-45 to allow provincial governments to ban home growing themselves. Now, this is not a rational or evidence-based approach to cannabis policy. As the College of Family Physicians of Canada put it, “Banning home growing for personal use defeats the purpose of legalization, which is to reduce the harms of criminalization.”
New Democrats believe that, under legalization, the personal production of cannabis should be permitted, similar to the home production of alcohol, such as beer and wine. Personal production would play an essential role in eliminating the illicit cannabis market since it would ensure that individuals who want to consume cannabis can afford it and have access to it in regions without nearby retail storefronts. For many Canadians, particularly those in rural areas who would not be served well by the retail marketing of cannabis, this may be the only way to get access to cannabis.
 I would point out that under the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling, medical cannabis users are allowed to grow their own cannabis. In some cases, they are growing eight plants, and they can obtain a licence from another person and grow for that person. Would it not be the height of folly if across Canada one house on a block could grow cannabis, because it is grown for medical reasons, but the house beside it could not, because it is for recreational purposes? That is the height of inequity and it would make a mockery of the law.
I would point out that the health and safety issues generally associated with home cultivation are overwhelmingly the result of large-scale, industrial, illicit growing operations that operate covertly in residential buildings due to prohibition. This can result in damage due to improper ventilation, and the illegal electrical hook-ups pose a fire risk. However, the personal cultivation of four plants would obviously not pose similar risks any more than growing four plants of any other species in the home. I daresay that most Canadians in an average household have more than four plants in their house. By contributing to the dismantling of the illicit market, home cultivation would actually serve to help eliminate those covert industrial growing operations.
Furthermore, I would point out that raw cannabis plants are non-psychoactive. According to University of British Columbia botany professor Jonathan Page, who testified at committee, if anybody, including a child, were to eat the raw bud of cannabis, that person would get the acidic form, which is non-psychoactive. The fresh material is not capable of getting one high. One needs to bake it, heat it, or smoke it in order to obtain that result.
The government chose to reject this amendment because it said, “t is critically important to permit personal cultivation in order to support the government’s objective of displacing the illegal market.” Canada's New Democrats agree. 
On potency limits, the Senate also proposed an undefined potency limit for cannabis products. I think the Conservatives are supporting this. On this point, it is important to note that the task force on cannabis legalization and regulation rejected potency limits for a number of reasons. It believed that if prohibited these products would continue to be available on the illicit market. The task force also concluded that there was insufficient evidence even to identify what a safe potency limit would be. The task force emphasized the significant risks associated with the illicit production of high potency concentrate, and instead called on the government to regulate them within a legal market. 
I would point out that illicit producers often use flammable solvents, such as butane, to extract cannabinoids from plants, an inherently dangerous process that can also leave carcinogenic residues on the end product. Product safety was also a concern as the extraction process may also concentrate contaminants, such as heavy metals and other impurities in addition to THC. 
 The government rejected this amendment because “the government has already committed to establishing THC limits in regulations, which will provide flexibility to make future adjustments based on new evidence and product innovation.” While we support the decision to reject this amendment, Canada's New Democrats believe that the government should heed the advice of the task force in this area.
On branding, the Senate proposed deleting a provision of Bill C-45  that currently would allow a person to promote cannabis, a cannabis accessories or a service related to cannabis by displaying a brand element on the thing, provided that it would not be associated with young persons, appealing to young persons, or associated with a way of life that would include glamour, recreation, excitement, vitality, risk, or daring.
 The government rejected the Senate's amendment because “the Cannabis Act already includes comprehensive restrictions on promotion.” Again, Canada's New Democrats agree.
 Branding restrictions on cannabis in Bill C-45 are there now. Indeed, they are already more stringent than those applied to alcohol. I do not need to remind any of the members of the House of the tragedy that occurred just a few months ago. A young Quebec girl died after consuming a high alcohol volume drink and ended up drowning in a river. If we look at that product, it is definitely marketed to young people, even to children, and there are no similar restrictions on alcohol. The House should look at closing that in the future.
With respect to parental sharing in the home, just as is currently the case with alcohol, the Senate proposed to allow parents to share cannabis with a younger family member of at least 17 years of age in the home. Canada's New Democrats believe this was a sensible proposal and the government was ill-advised to reject this amendment.
 We currently allow this approach for alcohol because we understand that parents can be trusted to model responsible behaviour to their children and to make positive choices for their family's well-being. In fact, the New Democrats believe parental education will be a key component of low-risk use of cannabis and should not be criminalized. After the bill becomes law, parents will be able to legally consume cannabis in the house, and if they want to pass a joint to their 17-year-old and discuss responsible use of cannabis, the bill would make that a crime. We do not think that is sensible. 
The government has also rejected the Senate's parallel proposal to ensure that sharing among individuals close in age within two years would not be criminalized, and that a cannabis offence carrying a sentence of less than six months would not be used in deportation proceedings for someone without citizenship status.
 The government justified its rejection by saying, “the criminal penalties and the immigration consequences aim to prevent young people from accessing cannabis and to deter criminal activity by imposing serious criminal penalties for prohibited activities...”. 
If criminalization and the threat of imprisonment or deportation prevented people from using cannabis, then Canadians would not be consuming an estimated 655 metric tonnes of it per year and we would not have the second highest rate of cannabis use among youth between 16 and 24 in the world, and that is when we have full criminalization and life sentences for trafficking. 
Contrasting that, a single bottle of liquor is enough to kill a child, and yet I know of no 14-year prison sentence arising from the distribution of beer or liquor. However, a parent who shares a joint with his or her son or daughter who is 17 would be a criminal under this legislation. An adult who possesses 31 grams of cannabis in public would be a criminal. A youth who possesses more than 5 grams of cannabis would be a criminal. An 18-year-old who passes a joint to a 17-year-old friend would be a criminal. An adult who grows five cannabis plants would be a criminal. 
This kind of continued criminalization is inconsistent with a rational and evidence-based criminal justice policy and will only serve to reduce the positive impacts of the bill. The prohibitionist approach has been repeatedly discredited by its failure throughout history.
For far too long, we have wasted billions of dollars in resources in the criminal justice system by criminalizing otherwise law-abiding citizens at an alarming rate for simply possessing and consuming cannabis. In fact, we are today. According to Statistics Canada, in 2016, the most recent year of available data, there were about 55,000 offences related to cannabis reported to police and police charged 17,733 people with pot possession.
A recent Vice News investigation found that black and indigenous men and women have been overrepresented in cannabis possession arrests across Canada just in the year since the Liberals formed government, and yet Bill C-45 would preserve the criminalized approach to cannabis, along with the damaging paternalism of the war on drugs.
I want to be clear that from the very beginning Canada's New Democrats have worked hard to reach across the aisle with constructive proposals to improve the bill. These changes included the following: providing pardons to Canadians saddled with a criminal record for offences that will no longer be offences under Bill C-45. This amendment was ruled outside the scope of Bill C-45. However, given the Prime Minister's previous statements, it is shocking that the Liberal government would structure a so-called cannabis legalization bill in such a way that pardons could not be included through amendment.
We proposed empowering provincial governments to create parallel production licensing regimes in order to give provinces the flexibility to implement legalization in the manner best suited to their jurisdiction. For example, this would have allowed provinces to let craft growers, small scale producers, and outdoor growers compete against the federally licensed corporate giants.
As said earlier, we proposed the legalization of edibles and concentrates, which are among the safest ways to consume cannabis and are the growing part of the market. This would allow Canadians and entrepreneur of businesses across the country to provide safe, regulated products to customers instead of allowing this to be provided underground.
We proposed decriminalizing the penalties section in line with the Tobacco Act. We proposed that the legalization should take a regulatory approach with significant fines for offences rather than criminal ones.
 One of the purposes of Bill C-45, as laid out in section 7, is to “reduce the burden on the criminal justice system in relation to cannabis.” Penalties in the bill should be consistent with that stated intent.
I am disappointed that the government chose to reject these vital proposals, but I am heartened that the bill at least contains a mandatory review of Bill C-45's operation in the next Parliament. I view this as a tacit admission by the government that it knows the bill contains problematic sections that will need to be fixed.
To be clear, Canada's New Democrats will support this motion and this legislation because we have fought for an end to prohibition ever since the 1971 LeDain Commission. The bill before us today is an important step forward but it is far from perfect.
After the last election, Canadians rightfully expected that the Liberals would produce a timely and fair cannabis law. As it now stands, the federal government has left the heavy-lifting of legalization to the provincial, territorial, municipal, and indigenous governments. The bill will lead to the emergence of a patchwork approach to legalization that will shut out the most long-standing cannabis activists, the folks who have spent decades honing their craft and providing world-leading medicinal cannabis to patients across Canada.
Some provinces have chosen to impose a government retail monopoly, some have chosen to shut out existing compassion clubs, and some provinces are pushing to ban home growing outright. This is disappointing. It is a lost opportunity. It is a betrayal of the clear promise that the Liberals made to Canadians in 2015.
Done properly, an appropriate legal approach to cannabis can achieve impressive benefits economically, technologically, and medicinally. The New Democrats will continue to work to provide the best cannabis legislation in the world for Canadians.
 
Bill Blair: Madam Speaker, the member began his remarks by making some very disparaging remarks and named a number of individuals, suggesting somehow they had done something improper.
 I know the member and I know he would never knowingly disparage an innocent Canadian. I know he believes, as I do, that parliamentary privilege is not a licence to slander innocent Canadians. I want to advise him that of the five people he mentioned as having some kind of privileged access to the cannabis business through Health Canada, four of those individuals were denied their licence applications and were not successful. They are no longer, in any way, associated with the licensed cannabis industry. The one who actually was approved, was approved by the previous government, when the Conservatives were in power.
I want to give the member opposite an opportunity to apologize to those individuals who he unjustly disparaged.
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, that comment reveals a sensitivity that is far in excess of what I actually said. I will not apologize to the House for pointing out hypocrisy.
When a former Conservative cabinet minister compared cannabis to murder and was part of the police process to actively prosecute Canadians for cannabis and is now rushing to profit from the industry, when former Prime Minister John Turner, who as prime minister of the country, could have brought in cannabis legislation, or decriminalization if he wanted to, and chose instead to perpetuate a criminal approach to cannabis and is now seeking to profit from it, it is rightful to point out that kind of hypocrisy, and Canadians deserve to know.
At the same time, all those Canadians who have been working under this prohibitionist criminal regime, who have fought and put their liberty at risk, who have sometimes achieved criminal records and now, under this legislation, may not even be able to participate in the legalized market, I find that hypocritical. I find that unjust.
Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC): Madam Speaker, I find it very disturbing to listen to the debate and to see the breakneck speed with which the Liberals and the NDP want to have this law come into place. Our police agencies, including the RCMP, are not set up to handle drug-impaired driving.
For those individuals in rural areas, like my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman—
[Intervention]
An hon. member:  It's happening now.
James Bezan:  Madam Speaker, I am trying to make a point here, and the member keeps—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I want to remind members that if they have anything to contribute, then they should stand and attempt to be recognized.
James Bezan: Madam Speaker, the member needs to be very aware that there will now be a process to determine the level of impairment. Right now, if people are caught with any type of narcotic in their system, it is an illegal activity. Now we will have to determine whether that individual is driving under the influence of marijuana. Of course we only have so much resources in rural areas.
 In my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, which is about the same size as the state of Israel, we are looking at maybe one or two officers in the entire region who will have the ability to make that determination on whether somebody is impaired. If that individual is on leave, if that individual is taking time off or is not on shift, how are we ever going to charge anyone? This will give free licence for everybody to be out there driving under the influence of marijuana.
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, I think I speak for every member of the House, and we can join issue, with the fact that nobody countenances or endorses any Canadian operating any kind of machinery, whether a motor vehicle or anything else, or coming to work under the influence of cannabis. We all agree with that.
I would also point out that it is against the law now. People cannot operate motor vehicles under the influence of cannabis now. Canadians should be well aware of that. We have impaired driving laws in the country. The current law that is before the Senate, Bill C-46, is an attempt to modernize that law with a specific focus on cannabis. There are certain problems with that bill too, by the way, which is that it seems to be quite difficult right now to get an accurate reading of impairment or set an appropriate per se blood limit reading for cannabis. There are some problems with that.
At the moment, we all know that driving under the influence of cannabis is against the law, and it should be treated that way.
I want to talk about whether we are ready or not. Very many times Canadians are ahead of politicians. The vast majority of Canadians have voted with their actions for years now. Millions of Canadians have used cannabis and continue to use cannabis, and they do not feel they are criminals by doing so. This law is an attempt to catch up to the reality in Canada.
Mr. Jim Eglinski (Yellowhead, CPC): Madam Speaker, last year I stayed in Ottawa on July 1 for Canada Day celebrations. It was kind of a disappointing day because it rained really hard, and then I found a lot of the music had nothing to do with Canada's heritage or history. Anyways, we will leave that aside.
What I did notice last year being here on Canada Day was that Wellington was pretty well plugged with people waiting to get in here, thousands and thousands of people trying to go through security to get on Ottawa's main grounds up here.
I wonder if the member could just use his imagination and imagine all of them having a little bit of smoke, or a little toke, whatever we want to call it. We have Ribfest coming next week, and we know how this town smells so great during Ribfest. Imagine what Wellington would smell like with 10,000 people smoking marijuana. I wonder if the member could imagine that.
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, I am going to end by asking the hon. member to use his imagination as well to focus on a piece of this bill that has another problem with it, and that is that this bill would prevent the exportation of recreational cannabis products. As countries around the world start to legalize, and they are and they will, as California, Colorado, Washington State, and many other states in the union and jurisdictions around the world have done, the ability to support our entrepreneurs who can develop safe, healthy, high-quality products for the world is something we should be supporting in this House. Imagine Canada being a world leader in a new product regarded around the world as being safe and of the highest quality. That is the kind of policy we should be working to develop in this House of Commons.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's Order Paper.

Private Members' Business
Latin American Heritage Month Act[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from June 6 consideration of Bill S-218, Latin American Heritage Month Act, as reported (without amendment) from the committee, and of Motion No. 1.
Mr. Matthew Dubé (Beloeil—Chambly, NDP): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to this bill to create Latin American Heritage Month.
I want to take this opportunity to highlight an organization in my riding, since we so rarely have the opportunity to do so. We try to do that during debates on bills and during members' statements, before question period.
I can explain how this ties directly to the importance of having a month to celebrate this heritage. I am specifically thinking about Solidarité Montérégie Amérique Centrale, an organization that operates primarily in my riding, and about Monique Messier, the chair of its board of directors, and her entire team. This organization has been around for years, and since I became a member of Parliament I have had the opportunity to attend their Arte y Cerveza fundraising soirees. These events allow the organization to continue operating, and provide opportunities for cultural sharing. 
Cultural sharing is one of the most important things we can do in a diverse society like ours, and I would say that these events highlight most of all our values of solidarity. They focus on culture and include exhibits of all kinds of artworks, which explains the word Arte in the name. These soirees also provide an opportunity to learn about what this organization's volunteers are doing in Central America, and the money raised helps pay for the volunteers to get there. 
I am very happy to say that I have been supporting this organization since becoming an MP. Bertrand St-Arnaud, the former MNA for Chambly and minister of justice, did a good thing when he allocated funding to that organization. I remember his speech when his ministry announced the funding. He said that the Quebec ministry of justice's main concern was the administration of justice and the courts, but that it also gave money to organizations that promote ideals of justice in Canada, Quebec, and abroad. That was his justification, and he was spot on, so I would like to take this opportunity to give him credit for that.
Events like that highlight the values of solidarity and sharing that are important to Quebeckers. They remind us that we can see beyond our borders, take the time to visit other countries and learn more about their cultures, and really make an important contribution.
When I think about Solidarité Montérégie Amérique Centrale, or SMAC, I remember seeing videos and photos taken during trips to help build schools or proper sanitary facilities for people in countries like Guatemala. That is highly commendable.
The sharing goes both ways though, and that is the beauty of this organization's mission. People from those countries also come visit us in Quebec and participate in activities hosted by our community organizations and our community. They come to share their art and culture. During these soirees, we get to connect with volunteers who talk about their experiences and with Guatemalans who tell us what the organization's work has done for their communities. That is extremely important, and it makes me so proud.
There are many organizations doing commendable work in our ridings. We can all agree on that. However, it is sometimes harder to convince people to go help out in other countries. We tend to help our neighbours and stay close to home, and with reason, that being said. Nevertheless, the opportunity to go help beyond our borders is extremely important. Canadians of Latin American origin, from Central America, contribute immensely to our culture. That is why it is important to have opportunities to honour their contributions.
 It can be hard to see the point of a bill designating a month to celebrate the heritage of a particular cultural community. I myself have a cynical side, I admit. However, this is extremely important, because we have to duty to remember, to share, to exchange, and to celebrate. Whether it is for Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day, Canada Day, Canadian Jewish Heritage Month, or Sikh heritage month, we must always pay tribute to the efforts parliamentarians make to designate these months of recognition.
 It is understandable that people view the purely symbolic value of such a month with a cynical eye, but it is important to take a few moments to stop and acknowledge that a given cultural community has made a substantial contribution and that meaningful exchanges have taken place. I myself am using the debate on this bill as an opportunity to talk about a major organization in my riding whose work would not normally be recognized in the House of Commons. That is why it is so vital to have opportunities like this.
However, before I go any further, I would like to apologize, Mr. Speaker, because I should have first paid tribute to the senator who sponsored this bill and who died tragically. We offer our condolences to his family and loved ones. This bill is part of his legacy. I also thank the member for Thornhill for introducing this bill.
The organization that I was talking about is Solidarité Montérégie Amérique Centrale or SMAC. I am pleased to continue to support that organization and I want to acknowledge its 20th anniversary in the House of Commons. I would also like to take this opportunity to apologize to its representatives for missing the anniversary celebration. I was unable to make it, because I was also the honorary chair for the Relay for Life in Chambly. Unfortunately, members cannot be in two places at once, even though we sometimes try.
I am very proud to support this organization and see it diversify its activities. SMAC started out as a cocktail-and-auction fundraiser. Today, it has grown and now it hosts a dance and an art exhibit. This year, events were held on both Friday and Saturday, and artists were invited. It is so nice to see that. I fully support these people and commend them for their efforts. As it celebrates its 20th anniversary, I wish this organization continued success.
In closing, I want to come back to what I was saying about designated months. We have to understand that we have some rather large communities. Since becoming a member of Parliament, I have been hearing my colleagues talk about certain cultural communities that represent one million Canadians, or 500,000 Canadians. It can be breathtaking to see such wonderful diversity. We must highlight diversity and encourage cultural exchanges. It is the best way to promote community spirit, love, and respect for our neighbours. Organizations that promote solidarity help in achieving that objective. 
Again, I want to congratulate SMAC and the sponsor of this bill. Even when we think that a bill is purely symbolic, we must never turn our backs on the importance of celebrating an occasion and heritage with our neighbours in order to promote community spirit. These are the values of Quebeckers and Canadians, and I am proud to share those values.
Alain Rayes: Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague on the speech he just gave on Bill S-218.
I want to begin by paying tribute to the late Senator Tobias Enverga, the sponsor of this legislative measure and a great Filipino-Canadian who advocated for multiculturalism.
Mr. Speaker, I thank you in helping me to quiet things down in the House.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mr. Anthony Rota): I would ask those in the House to show some respect for the person who is speaking, because he is trying to deliver a speech that I look forward to hearing and there are distractions that prevent me from doing so.
Mr. Charlie Angus: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I was not sure if the Speaker was referring to me, but I want to apologize if my singing of Latin American songs interfered in any way. I have enormous respect for you, so I will take my singing outside.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mr. Anthony Rota): I thank the hon. member for that, and I am sure the Grievous Angels will depart.
Alain Rayes: Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and the beautiful songs he treated us to. 
I would like to pay tribute to the late Senator Tobias Enverga, the sponsor of this legislation and a great Filipino Canadian who advocated for multiculturalism. I would like to point out that he is the first Canadian of Filipino heritage to serve in the Senate. He was born in the Philippines and was appointed to the upper chamber in 2012 to represent Ontario. He proudly represented not only people from the Filipino community, but many different groups living in the greater Toronto area and elsewhere in Canada, and he did so in a very positive way.
We are debating this today thanks to the member for Thornhill, my colleague who was delighted to sponsor the bill in order to move it along in honour of Mr. Enverga. The bill reads as follows: 
 An Act respecting Latin American Heritage Month 
 Preamble 
 Whereas 
 the Parliament of Canada recognizes that members of the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic and political fabric of the nation; 
 Whereas the designation of a month as Latin American Heritage Month would be a meaningful way to remember, celebrate and educate the public about these contributions; 
 Whereas Latin American communities across Canada would be mobilized by a Latin American Heritage Month to jointly celebrate, share and promote their unique culture and traditions with all Canadians; 
 And whereas October is a significant month for the Latin American community around the world; 
 Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: 
 ... 
 Throughout Canada, in each and every year, the month of October is to be known as “Latin American Heritage Month”. 
The month of October was chosen because that is the same month designated in the United States to mark this event. 
Who are the members of the Latin American diaspora? By definition, they come from all parts of America where people mainly speak Spanish and Portuguese. We are talking about 20 or so countries in all, with 18 Spanish-speaking countries and one where Portuguese is spoken.
It was just announced that the World Cup will be held here. Latin American countries love soccer, or fútbol as some fans like me call it. I have many friends who are fans of soccer and who come from countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, which is a beautiful country where many people vacation, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru—and this gives me the opportunity to say hello to my good friend Marisol Hidalgo, who is originally from there and the wife of one of my French friends—the Dominican Republic, Salvador, Uruguay, and Venezuela. I have had the opportunity to visit and to vacation in some of these countries.
There are more than 400 million Spanish speakers in the world. It is currently the second most spoken language. More than 363 million of these speakers live in Latin America. I mention these big numbers because they are reflected in our international schools and language schools. We live in a bilingual country, where we speak English and French, but Spanish is often the third language children learn. It is a good tool for their future. My three children had the opportunity to learn Spanish in high school, and I am proud that they are able to speak in this language.
Between 1996 and 2001 in Canada, the Latin American population increased by 32%, which is significant. Seven out of 10 people came between 1991 and 2011. According to the most recent data from the 2011 National Household Survey, there are approximately 750,000 people of Latin American origin. The population of Canada is about 34.5 million, so that represents a rather large community. The majority of members from this community were born abroad. Now, we can say that 32.5% were born in Canada. Canada has welcomed Latin American immigrants for more than fifty years.
Based on available data, we know that nearly 23% of immigrants came from the Americas. Although there are no absolute census numbers covering this broad and somewhat imprecise measure, we might estimate a probable demographic well over half a million men, women, and children, and this number is growing quickly.
I want to point out how much they contribute to Canada. They work, buy goods, contribute to the economy, and help fill our labour shortage. Everyone knows we are in the middle of a labour shortage.
 In 2013, they surpassed the employment rate of people born in Canada. People often think that immigrants have a harder time finding work, but in this case, they surpassed the employment rate in the labour market. Tens of thousands of workers from Latin America come every year to work temporarily in various regions of Canada and in various sectors, especially in the agricultural sector, where there is a labour shortage. 
Latin America is the fourth-largest source of immigration to Canada. That is really something. Those people bring with them a diversity of cultures, a variety of food, and a wealth of knowledge. Earlier I named most of the countries covered by this bill. We all know people who come from those areas. They are all friendly, kind, and intelligent people who contribute to the development of our wonderful country. 
Why a Latin American heritage month? It is simply about paying homage to the culture, the traditions, and the contributions made by this community to our society.
The Day of the Dead is celebrated in November in many countries, but the festivities start in October, hence the reason to start in October like the Americans. 
October 12 is the day of indigenous resistance in Costa Rica, the day of respect for cultural diversity in Venezuela, the day of the Americas in Argentina and Uruguay, and children's day in Brazil. 
Another interesting fact is that the United States celebrates exactly the same holiday, National Hispanic Heritage Month, from September 15 to October 15. 
In 1988, Canada became the first country to pass a law on multiculturalism, simply known as the Canadian Multiculturalism Act.
This official recognition is in line with other similar commemorations that reinforce how important cultural communities are to our Canadian identity, such as Black History Month in February and Asian Heritage Month in May. 
On a more personal note, I am the son of immigrants. My mother and father were born in Egypt. I experienced the process of settling in our country and the desire to learn even more about everything that is good in Canada, while respectfully sharing our own family cultures. 
Members should also know that this contributes to our collective history of protecting our rights and freedoms under the principles of peace, order, and good governance.
As mentioned by the sponsor of the bill, the member for Thornhill, the Latin American population in Canada is young. According to Statistics Canada, almost 50% of people of Latin American origin living in Canada are under 25 years old. In light of the difficulties caused by the demographic shock that we are currently experiencing, this is an interesting fact. This population is young and can contribute for many more years to the development of our country. Seniors represent less than 5% of those reporting Latin American origins in the last census, compared to 12% of all Canadians for the same age group. This is a noteworthy statistic.
I join all my colleagues here to pay tribute to Senator Tobias C. Enverga Jr., the author of this legislation, by moving this bill forward and recognizing the month of October as Latin American heritage month here in Canada, much like they do in the United States. I would like to pay tribute to this culture and to these people who contribute to our development across the country. 
Randy Hoback: Mr. Speaker, I am excited to talk about Latin America. When people first said Latin Americans want a month, I actually thought that we need more than a month with all that Latin America has to give and all the things we need to explore in Latin America. Thirty days is not enough time. 
I am pretty excited because I used to be the chair of ParlAmericas and now my good friend from Kenora has taken on that role. He has done a great job. Canada has really carved itself a niche in that entire region. We are looked upon. We are respected. We are kind of like a big brother in a lot of ways. They seek us for advice on legislation. They seek us for advice on all sorts of regulations. 
Through ParlAmericas we have done a great job in actually building bridges in countries right across the whole hemisphere. Now I can pick up the phone because of ParlAmericas and talk to somebody in Brazil at a moment's notice, or in Chile, Peru, or Costa Rica. Those are the things that we have done through ParlAmericas, bringing parliamentarians together and sharing best practices, what works and what does not work, and learning from each other. That has made us an even tighter knit community. That is to our benefit, to Canada's benefit, and to Latin America's benefit. 
When we look at the potential in Latin America we just say “wow”. Looking at the people, whether they are Portuguese, Spanish, or French, the entire region has so much dynamic to it, so much flare and ambiance with a love of family and a love of life.
My first trip to Latin America was actually to Brazil. I remember being out at a restaurant at 11 o'clock at night and looking over at the table next to me. There were two families having dinner together and they were laughing. I was thinking, it is 11 o'clock at night, why are these kids out? Then talking to a friend of mine he said that it was two teenagers out on a date. The teenagers were bringing the entire family on a date. That is part of their tradition. That is part of their culture. That is something that is appreciated and celebrated. It is quite a bit different from my kids who if they were on a date I probably did not even know about it until a week later. Right away, I could see how much family meant to them. 
Then talking to them about what they do on the weekends and in the evenings, they have a love for life. They really know how to live life, appreciate the small things in life, and pull all that value out of those small things, and treasure them, and treasure each other. 
Canadians, when we are doing the nine to five, or nine to 10, or, in this case, nine to midnight or 10 to midnight, sometimes we forget we need to express that love for life and to have that joyful time among family and friends.
The next trip was to Peru, Chile, and Costa Rica. I had the honour of going down there with the Prime Minister on two occasions. Again, in those scenarios, the world leaders in those regions really respected Canada. I think there are many reasons why. Part of it was that we never preached. We never went down there and told them they had to do this or do that. We always went down there with a manner of respect. We listened. We learned. We would give advice if they asked for it. We led by example. They appreciated that.
One thing I found when working with people from Latin America is that, when doing business there, the people want to know who we are. They want to understand where people come from and about their families. Once they have a comfortable relationship, then they are ready to get on to business. It is so different from other countries in the world where one sits down, has a business meeting, and that is it. Latin American people really want to know who they are working with and who they are doing business with. It is such a nice concept to have that in a business relationship.
I remember being in Cartagena, at the OAS, or the Summit of the Americas, watching President Obama. I remember sitting in the runway in the Prime Minister's jet looking out the window and there was President Obama's jet, and then there was a little jet that was Hilary Clinton's jet. I was laughing that they both came in separate planes. Maybe there were security reasons for doing that. 
However, I remember talking to some of my friends down there. I said, “Isn't it nice the Americans are here?” They said, “Yes, it's nice but they only come once in a while and they write a cheque and then they expect us to do what they want. They don't get to know us. They don't actually understand who we are and what we are doing. They just drop in, drop out, and say, this is what we want.” They do not like that. They like the Canadian approach where they are treated as a friend and a partner, where respect is shown.
I think that is why we see the warmth that we have with the people and the countries in that region. I think that is why we have trade agreements with Panama, Costa Rica, Honduras, Chile, Peru, and Colombia. Hopefully, we will see something in Mercosur countries somewhere down the road. Hopefully, we will do something with the Pacific Alliance that will even bring us closer and closer together. There are so many opportunities to do business and trade in that region. 
As we do business and trade in those areas, their standard of living and quality of life are going to get better. Their ability to purchase more goods and have the things we have here in Canada will become easier. As we look at security in the region, it will become safer.
I encourage everyone, especially when it is minus-40 in Saskatchewan or Winnipeg, to acknowledge that Latin America is our saving grace sometimes. A lot of people from Saskatchewan travel and participate in tourism in places like Mexico, the Caribbean, and the Dominican Republic. A lot of people in my riding go and live in Mexico in the wintertime. They love Saskatchewan in the summertime. I would encourage everyone to come to Saskatchewan in the summertime. It is cheaper to come to Saskatchewan and travel because there is no carbon tax. I just had to get that in there. 
However, a lot of people like to get away in the wintertime, whether it is for a week, two weeks, or a month. Where do they go? They go to Latin America. Why? It is the guaranteed sunshine and the friendly people. They love Canadians. They like who we are. They like to talk to us. They like to visit with us. It is such a nice environment and we have become such close friends.
 The other thing we have had from Latin America, especially for our honey producers, is a stable force of labour through temporary foreign workers who come in the summer, work in the beehives, and do the work we cannot get Canadians to do. Then they go home and take care of their families in the wintertime, because they do not like Canadian winters, and I do not blame them. It has created a scenario where we have all these people coming into Saskatchewan in the springtime, working right through to September or October, and going back home. Again, families and friends are being created, connections are being created, and it has been a win-win for everyone involved.
I also remember the time I went to Honduras and toured a plant of a company from Montreal, whose name escapes me right now. As we toured that plant I saw how modern it was. Talking to the people on the floor, they said it was so nice that a Canadian company would invest in their region and give them jobs. Those jobs are well appreciated. The company is providing great value to the community, but also it is not taking advantage of the people in the community. It is treating them with respect, offering health care, a fair wage, and excellent working conditions. In fact, we could put that facility in Honduras in Montreal and we would not notice the difference. That is where Canadian companies have played a proper role in the region.
I would be remiss not to talk about Canadian companies in the mining sector in Latin America. We all know that the TSX is the exchange for the mining sector around the world, and we have a lot of Canadian companies doing business in Central and South America, and in the Caribbean. Our companies have recognized the importance of being good corporate citizens. 
One of the things I did when I was travelling with ParlAmericas was that I always tried to make part of my trip a tour of a Canadian facility. For example, when I was in Suriname I went to see IAMGOLD's gold mine. One can actually go there and see how it is operating. The nice thing to say about those mines, and this mine in particular, is that the safety standards were equal if not better than they would be in Saskatchewan, Quebec, or anywhere in Canada. That is, again, working well to build our Canadian brand around the world. 
When we look at all these things, 30 days probably is not enough time to celebrate our relationship with Latin America. In fact, if we were to go country by country, we could probably do two or three days for each country, just talking about their culture and heritage, and getting a good understanding of who they are. 
This is a really good first step, and I am really excited to see this come forward. I am glad to speak to it, and really look forward to working with the people in Latin America into the future, both in my role as a parliamentarian, and even after, some day when I am no longer a parliamentarian, perhaps in the role of a tourist. 
Matt Jeneroux: Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this tremendous opportunity to speak about Bill S-218, the Latin America heritage month act, brought forward by the hon. member for Thornhill. This is a wonderful opportunity to speak about the many great contributions Latin America has made to Canada. I am glad this bill is now being discussed to honour the memory of late senator Tobias Enverga, who I will talk about later in my speech. 
In my hometown of Edmonton, Latin America is celebrated annually with the Edmonton Latin Festival. This event is held during the third week of August every year in Churchill Square. The energy felt during this event is contagious and a great chance for the people of Edmonton to try different foods and dances, and learn more about Latin American culture. At the festival, there is an opportunity for people to learn about different dances, including the zumba, mariachi, samba, mambo, the tango, and salsa. Latin American bands are also a huge part of the festival and the upbeat tunes always put smiles on so many faces. This Edmonton Latin Festival is growing every year and I encourage anyone visiting Edmonton in August to stop by and experience the Latin American culture.
Latin American festivals are held across the country, with annual events in Toronto, Vancouver, and right here in Ottawa. These events are an excellent way for Canadians to come together to celebrate Latin America and learn more about the cultural and ancestral heritage of many fellow Canadians. There are estimated to be about 600,000 people of Latin American descent living in Canada. Latin America is the fourth largest source of immigrants to Canada, with more and more people from Latin America arriving annually. My home province of Alberta has one of the highest concentrations of Latin Americans within it, and I am proud to be from a province that has welcomed and embraced so many Latin American immigrants and their families. 
Football, or soccer, as we call it, is a national sport of Brazil and a popular game of many Latin American countries. Just today, we learned Canada will host some of the World Cup games during FIFA 2026. Some of these games will likely be in Edmonton, and I am so excited to celebrate the sport with fans from around the world during that World Cup. 
Alberta has become a host to a variety of Spanish bilingual programs in both public and private school boards from Edmonton to Calgary and across the province, encouraging young Canadians from Latin American descent or those who are simply interested in the culture to pursue language studies. Sweet Grass Elementary School in my riding of Edmonton Riverbend is host to the well-known international Spanish academy program, which strives to help students develop language and literacy skills in Spanish and teaches students to use both Spanish and English to communicate. The program has had an emphasis on helping many students to learn about the cultures of Spanish-speaking countries, like those in Latin America. 
As well, universities across Canada offer both Spanish and Portuguese classes, proving that it is never too late to enrich your life with a second language or increase your knowledge of the culture. These programs also offer a means for immigrants from Latin American countries to stay in touch with their heritage and to continue to express and learn about their native culture. The culture these students learn about is rich and diverse, making for an educational and exciting program. 
Many students often travel to different countries in Latin America on exchange programs to get first-hand experience of the culture and lifestyle. The history of Latin America is not only important to those of Latin American descent, but to all Canadians, and all those in the western hemisphere. This part of the world contributes to the global economy and the relationship between states in America reflects the importance Latin America plays in global relations.
 Canada is proud to be a member of the Organization of American States, which includes 35 independent states of America, the vast majority of which are Latin American. Groups like OAS connect all Americans through politics, the economy, and the recognition of each other's culture. 
Latin America is a geographically diverse part of our hemisphere, encompassing Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and South America. It is comprised of 20 sovereign states and approximately 20 million people who speak Spanish, Portuguese, and French. The diverse climate promises skiing, surfing, hiking, and much more for both residents and tourists, attracting many people from around the world to experience not only the culture but the land itself.
Just like the area is geographically diverse, each country is culturally diverse. The Aztec empire was built in a modern-day Mexico City and the Aztecs developed an alphabet, created ceramic dishes, and left behind beautiful art. They left their legacy on modern-day Mexico with some parts of their language and traditional food still in use. 
Brazil, the largest country in Latin America, was founded in 1500 by the Kingdom of Portugal, though indigenous peoples inhabited the country before the Europeans arrived. Like Mexico, art and pottery were important parts of Brazil's development. Today, it is the largest Portuguese-speaking country in the world.
I am giving my colleagues this history and geography lesson to really highlight how remarkable the area of Latin America is. There are so many countries, languages, cultures, and people living in this region of the world. I believe it is important to recognize this area of the world and its peoples through a Latin American heritage month here in Canada. Throughout this heritage month, we would be able to celebrate all that Latin America and Latin American people have to offer the world and also acknowledge and honour their history and current presence in the world.
The idea for Latin American history month came from the late Senator Tobias Enverga, who was appointed to the upper house in 2012. Senator Enverga was the first senator of Filipino descent appointed to the Canadian Senate, and with his perspective as an immigrant, he saw the need for a new month to celebrate Latin America. He cited Black History Month and Asian Heritage Month as examples of educational and celebratory months that give all Canadians the opportunity to learn about different cultures and heritages. He argued a Latin American heritage month was deserving of national recognition, and I certainly agree.
Some Canadians might wonder why we have heritage months. These months are important to learn about and recognize the different cultures that have shaped Canada into what it is today. Learning about different cultures, countries, and parts of the world gives our citizens different perspectives and an appreciation for Canada. In May, Canada marked its first-ever Jewish Heritage Month, a great opportunity to reflect on the contributions of Jewish Canadians. I look forward to heritage months every year because I see them as an opportunity for learning and enrichment.
Senator Enverga introduced a bill in the last Parliament, Bill S-228, to create a Hispanic heritage month, which would complement designations already marked by the province of Ontario and the city of Toronto. However, the bill was a casualty of the 2015 election. After that, Senator Enverga altered the bill to focus on Latin America, which encapsulates not only Hispanic culture but francophone communities in Haiti and indigenous peoples in Latin America. 
The impact of Latin American culture on Canada cannot be understated. Traditional Latin American food has become common on menus in tens of thousands of restaurants across the country. Spanish is one of the most common languages spoken by Canadians after English and French, and salsa dancing continues to be a popular hobby for many Canadians.
Canada was declared a multicultural nation about 50 years ago. Our multiculturalism designation recognizes the great contributions of so many immigrants who have shaped the landscape of this country. In our bigger cities like Edmonton, Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal, a person can visit so many corners of the world through restaurants, festivals, stores, and films. Our nation is admired by so many people across the world for our openness, acceptance, and ability to live among one another peacefully.
In the coming years, with birth rates predicted to continue decreasing, immigration will become even more important for workforce and population maintenance. I am proud to be from a country where immigration is not only happily accepted, but widely encouraged and embraced. I admire immigrants for their courage to leave their country and start a new life in Canada, which often includes learning English or French. Immigrants from Latin America have a great impact on the Canadian workforce, our culture, and our heritage. We are proud to accept Latin Americans from a diverse range of countries into Canada. 
I think it is a great idea to formally recognize the month of October as Latin American heritage month, and I wholeheartedly support the hon. member for Thornhill's private member's bill for this declaration. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to speak about the bill today, and thankful for the contributions and hard work of so many people of Latin American descent who now call Canada home. I hope to be able to join my colleagues in celebrating Latin American heritage month this coming October.
Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to talk here today on Bill S-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month. It is very important, not only for Canada, but also for my constituency of Windsor West. We are one of the border cities. In fact, I would argue we have a unique feature in our area in that not only were Latin Americans part of the founding of Windsor and Essex County, they are part of our continued trade every day. In fact, approximately 40% of Canada's daily trade with the United States happens through my community of Windsor, and it happens along two kilometres of the international border. We have four crossings that are part of the overall footprint for this trade. What is important is that the—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mr. Anthony Rota): I want to remind the hon. members that there is a debate taking place. If you could show some respect for the person speaking, that would be great.
[Member spoke in Spanish]
[English]
We will continue.
Brian Masse: Mr. Speaker, now we understand why we are two sword lengths apart in the chamber. I feel more secure with the Sergeant-at-Arms near me. 
You are able to articulate in such a colourful spirit this afternoon, going into a long evening.
It is important in a practical sense to recognize Latin American month and the economic development and the cultural experience in my riding. Not only do we trade 40% with the United States, but the vast majority of that also continues on to Mexico and to other Latin American countries.
We celebrate with the Fiesta Latino festival. The fourth annual festival will be June 30. This is important. Some may think that these months, even though they are symbolic, are very important. Our critic, the member for Vancouver East, has done wonderful work on this. She knows quite well that part of our founding and the importance of our communities and our country is not only having the connection of coming here, but it is also the continued connection with culture, heritage, and the experience of where they came from, including family members.
I want to note one of the most difficult and serious things that the government needs to look at is visitor visas, whether for Latin American countries or other countries around the world. Whether they be for weddings or funerals, visitor visitations in this country have ground to a halt. It is very serious. As we continue to recognize important connections like we are recognizing today and continue to grow those things, we cannot get away from the practical reality that is the continued connection of the cultural experience.
We have so many different independent days that are connected. We have trading partners in Latin America as well as Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Chile. These are all countries we have strong economic and social relationships with, and they have business relationships that come back to our communities.
As I look at this through a local lens, I am proud that we have many Latin Americans who not only come to the Windsor-Essex area, but also Chatham and Leamington to be part of our economy. They are temporary foreign workers who have expertise in the agriculture sector and are part of our families in many respects. In the House, there have been debate to try to improve their rights. We have had many families and workers' issues brought about because of the value they add to our country and communities. The Windsor-Essex region and Chatham-Kent-Leamington region have that type of economic connection to it.
We see the influence of those communities in the downtown districts or business districts where there are restaurants, grocery stores, and different staples that are basically built around that economic development. When we are looking at trade and commerce, those have become economic powerhouses. One should not underestimate the greenhouse industry and the agricultural industry that contribute to the welfare of our country and our taxation base. That is critical. 
Festivals like we have in Windsor increase our awareness and connect us to social justice issues. They also connect to a number of environmental issues that we are trying to push and develop. This includes celebrities in art, music or other realms, but also workers. That is important to recognize.
We had a delegation from Mexico here about two months ago. One of the key things they talked about was the working conditions in their auto industry and in other industries involved in the trade agreements we have. Family members and workers were challenged not only in the private sector industries, but also in the public sector, which includes universities, other educational institutions, and so forth.
Historically, we can look at Nicaragua and other places from which we have had people come to Canada looking for freedom and its expression, sometimes escaping difficult and extreme situations. They have been front and centre in founding and keeping a strong sense of social justice, acting as a moral compass for our own communities and our country.
In many respects, they have become agents of social change for our communities and for the globe. In fact, many people with different heritage backgrounds are coming to our country. Some are fighting for issues of social justice and welfare. After escaping regimes that have significant cruel and inhumane practices, they have now begun to form a better world for many more people.
Latin American heritage month is not just about the experience of the music, the food, and the colourful things that take place. It is about continuing to enshrine the responsibility we have in raising the next generation in a global village that works for social justice and humanity. What better way to do it than to continue to recognize not just the past, but, most importantly, the future? That is what this does.
The fourth annual festival in Windsor, happening on June 30, will be one of the many events across Canada proudly celebrating Latin heritage in our communities, and celebrating our continued economic, social, and cultural development in our neighbourhoods, our provinces, our country, and other places, like Latin homelands, in the world.
Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute honour to stand in the House today and speak to Bill S-218. This bill would designate the month of October each and every year Latin American heritage month. 
Permit me to begin by paying tribute to the late Senator Enverga, who was the author of this bill. He was the first Filipino Canadian to sit in the Senate, and he was a proud voice for his community during this time. Senator Enverga also brought a tremendous amount of passion, energy, and commitment to everything he did in this place, and we honour and respect him for that. He worked tirelessly in his role as senator, and he used his position to advocate for the most vulnerable members of society. In fact, he was a diligent champion for people with Down syndrome and a strong advocate for diversity and multiculturalism in Canada. 
Senator Enverga sat as co-chair of the Canada–Philippines Interparliamentary Group and inaugurated the annual Filipino Independence Day flag-raising on Parliament Hill, which is something we celebrated earlier this week. The senator loved his family, he loved his community, and he loved his country. He was proud to be Canadian. It is my hope that this private member's bill will pass through the House quickly, in honour of his memory.
What would Latin American heritage month look like? First, let us get an idea of the countries that would be involved. Latin America encompasses all the countries in the western hemisphere where Spanish, French, and Portuguese are spoken. This list is extensive. It includes Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Venezuela, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Cuba, Haiti, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Paraguay, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Panama, Puerto Rico, and Uruguay; and the French colonies of Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, St. Martin, and Saint-Barthélemy. Latin America clearly encompasses many different people and many different ways of life.
 There are many Canadians of Latin American descent. According to the 2011 census, nearly 545,000 people of Latin American origin live in Canada, a number that has continued to grow in the last seven years. Canadians of Latin American origin make up one of the largest non-European ethnic groups in Canada. Clearly there is a substantial population of these individuals, and they are ready to celebrate with us.
Canada has a strong history of partnership with Latin American countries. Our nation looks forward to helping in the continued development, growth, and integration of the entire hemisphere. 
As Conservatives, we have a strong history of partnership with Latin America. One of the most significant decisions in Canada's relations with Latin America took place under the government of Brian Mulroney, when he opted to join the Organization of American States as a full member in late 1989. We remember the words of the former external affairs minister, Joe Clark. He said, “For too long Canadians have seen this hemisphere as our house; it is now time to make it our home.” I fondly recall former prime minister Stephen Harper visiting Colombia, Chile, Barbados, and Haiti as one of his first major trips overseas. Members can see that Canada's relationship with Latin American countries is deeply valued.
When it comes to celebrating Latin American culture and heritage, there is a great deal we can talk about. The culture of Latin America is diverse and rich, with beautiful music and dance, delicious food, and stunning natural landmarks.
 With regard to dance and music, Latin American music and dance are both fun and challenging. The music is known for its strong rhythms, large percussion sections, and signature horns, and when we hear music from these regions, it is difficult not to start dancing. Often the different dances incorporate a lot of hip movement as well as quick steps and spins, something I would imagine you would be quite good at, Mr. Speaker. From the Caribbean region, we get rhythms like salsa and bachata. Brazil is famous for being the original place of the samba, a cheerful dance often performed at Carnival. The tango is another Latin dance. It originated in Argentina. I am sure these dances would be a lot of fun for all of us, and I look forward to the celebrations that are to come. Dance and music are a big part of this culture, and I look forward to the various festivities after declaring October Latin American heritage month.
Another significant aspect of Latin America is the food. I am sure all of us can appreciate the vast contributions of Latin America to the international culinary scene. Latin food is delicious and colourful and often full of interesting spices and exotic ingredients. Each country has signature dishes it is well known for.
 From Mexico, we have the classic tacos, burritos, quesadillas, fajitas, and more. Authentic Mexican food is very spicy, and they use a lot of chilies, which maybe is not for everyone but is certainly enjoyable for many. From Venezuela, we get the arepa, a round, flat corn patty filled with various fillings, such as cheese, avocado, meat, or beans. Argentina and Chile give us empanadas, hot patties made from flour and filled with meat, cheese, and beans. In Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil, we eat a lot of grilled meat.
As members can see, there is a lot of good food going on in Latin America, which will also be incorporated into our festivities, should this bill pass.
Latin American countries are also known for their beautiful landscapes and natural beauty. The many natural wonders attract tourists from around the world. Between Argentina and Brazil are the Iguazu Falls. At 269 feet, these falls dwarf Niagara Falls and are surely a sight to be seen.
In Peru, people can visit the Colca Canyon, which is about twice as deep as the Grand Canyon and is populated with towns founded in Spanish colonial times. While in Peru, people can also stop by Machu Picchu, which is one of the seven wonders of the world. Another incredible sight is the Amazon River, the longest river in the world, stretching at least 6,400 kilometres across South America. Its source is in the Andes Mountains and it empties in the Pacific Ocean.
 With mountains, waterfalls, rivers, and canyons, this region of the world is filled with beautiful natural landmarks. 
Of course, I cannot give a speech about Latin America without mentioning soccer, as it has been in so many speeches already. The fast-paced game is played throughout the region, and many accomplished teams have come from Latin American countries. I look forward to seeing many of these teams play in the World Cup this summer.
While there are many things to celebrate and enjoy in Latin American culture, we must acknowledge that this culture is diverse, and our country does not support everything done in each and every one of these countries. We strongly condemn the human rights violations committed by the Venezuelan government, and we urge the powers that be to establish a true democracy and to respect the dignity of human rights in their governing practices. 
We also condemn the human rights atrocities committed against the Colombian people and the faulty jail sentences given to many in Peru. We call upon all Latin American countries to respect human rights.
That said, Latin American heritage month is about celebrating the common people and the culture of Latin America. Why is it important to celebrate Latin American heritage month in Canada? As we have already established, Canada has a large Latin American population, one that continues to grow and contribute positively to Canadian society. This is an opportunity to honour it. We have many other months, days, and weeks dedicated to celebrating other cultures and heritages. It seems fitting, then, that we would take another month to celebrate Latin American culture. Surely we can find the opportunity to do that. 
I look forward to this bill passing, and when it does, I look forward to celebrating alongside my Latin American friends. In the company of hospitable people, beautiful music, enjoyable dance styles, and delicious food, I know that October, with all of its celebrations, will be a time we do not want to miss.
Mrs. Sylvie Boucher (Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this evening, I am very pleased to speak to Bill S-218, which seeks to designate October as Latin American heritage month.
Thanks to my two daughters, Mélinda and Marie-Catherine, I have had the opportunity to learn a lot about Latin American culture. When they were teenagers, my daughters became very close friends with the wonderful Cornejo and De Leon Velasquez families from El Salvador and the equally wonderful Neto family from Mexico. I was therefore able to discover this unique culture and often share delicious meals with these families. I remember Ms. De Leon Velasquez's delicious pupusas and tamales and the Neto family's amazing guacamole. What can I say about Latin American culture? Its music brings back memories of girls nights with my daughters and friends. The music of Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, Luis Fonsi, and Shakira, among others, made us dance, sing, and most importantly helped us discover the beauty of Latin American heritage.
Latin Americans brought colour and flavour into our lives. They shared with us their way of life and taught us to be more open to a people who may have had difficulty integrating into our society when they first arrived in Quebec or Canada. They are now quite well integrated and are sharing their culture, music, and food with us. 
By designating a Latin American heritage month, we will be opening ourselves to the world. We will be opening ourselves up to new cultures and a new vision of who we are as Quebeckers, Canadians, and in my case, as a French Canadian woman.
Unfortunately, I have not learned the language. I only know two words in Spanish, hola and qué tal. My daughters and my grandson speak Spanish. My seven-year-old grandson has friends from Mexico. I think it is great that at age seven he is learning French, English, and Spanish, and that he is discovering Latin American culture. I think it is great that this bill highlights the importance of Latin American heritage. 
What can we say about these Latin Americans who come here to lend a hand? In 2015, 9,000 Mexican and Guatemalan agricultural workers arrived in Quebec to help us in the fields. In my riding alone, there are many Guatemalans and Mexicans, especially in Île d'Orléans for the strawberry harvest. In the winter, more and more Mexicans come to Quebec to enjoy everything that our winters have to offer. We can learn a lot about ourselves from Mexican or Latino culture. Through their eyes and their friendship I realize how fortunate I am to spend time with them. They helped open my eyes to the world. They explained their culture and religion to me; how different they are from mine. Thanks to my daughters, they helped me discover the splendour of the Latin American community. That was in my old riding. In my new riding, I have a larger number of agricultural workers.
When I was the MP for Beauport—Limoilou, there was a very active community in Saint-Pie-X. There were always Guatemalans, Mexicans, and Salvadorans at Parc Bardy. All those wonderful people formed a community together with francophones from Ivory Coast and people from Senegal. My riding was multicultural. Multiculturalism is a great way to engage with the world. When my girls were teenagers and we went over to the Cornejos' or the De Leon Velasquezes' place, we got used to watching telenovelas. I told them I thought the shows were cheesy, but really, they were no cheesier than American tabloids.
The Latin American community is very tight-knit and family-oriented. Quebeckers are pretty family-oriented too, but we are more self-absorbed, and that is a shame. Latin American families offer a different perspective.
My girls are 29 and 30 now, and they still have the same friends. I knew Neto when he was 13 or 14, and now he is a young man with two daughters of his own. I think that is wonderful; they are just so beautiful. From my grandson's perspective, they are a kind of bridge between what we are and what they are. That community's culture is very important to me.
Usually, it is parents who raise children, but I am grateful to my girls for teaching me to be open to the rest of the world. When we take an interest in another culture and try to understand where people are coming from to see where they are going, when we understand that despite their differences other people can complement us, that changes everything.
This kind of bill may seem unimportant to some people, but it is very important to me because it underscores something very special: we are open to all communities. Today, our focus is on the Latin American community.
Today I would like to send greetings to Neto and the Cornejo and De Leon Velasquez families. I thank them for introducing me to their magnificent culture.
Mr. Bob Saroya (Markham—Unionville, CPC): Mr. Speaker, It is a pleasure, as always, to stand in the House and take part in the important conversations we have at the heart of Canadian democracy. Today I am pleased to join the conversation surrounding S-218, the Latin American heritage month act. I am especially proud to speak to this bill sponsored by my friend the late Hon. Senator Enverga.
I would like to say a few words about Senator Enverga before I discuss the bill.
Senator Enverga was the first Canadian of Filipino descent to be appointed to the Senate. He represented my home province of Ontario in the upper house after being appointed in 2012. He did outstanding work for the Filipino community, but also for a number of communities in the greater Toronto area, and across the country, my riding including.
 Speaking of my riding, we worked hand in hand for a number of years. Sometimes we met each other five or six times a week in the different communities for the different community functions all around the GTA. It was a pleasure to have been able to call him my friend.
Senator Enverga passed away on Thursday, November 16, while on parliamentary business in Colombia. However, even after his passing, Senator Enverga's Latin American heritage month bill lives on. This is his legacy. I am proud to be able to speak to the bill, and to contribute my thoughts here today.
 I would like to express my full support for this act. Multiculturalism is at the very core of our Canadian identity. Bill S-218 recognizes the many major contributions of the Canadian Latin American community to Canada's social, economic, and political fabric. It recognizes that the Latin American community is an important part of our diverse nation and collective heritage.
 I hope members of the Latin American community across the country are able to celebrate Latin American heritage month. Further, I hope the community is able to use it to share its unique culture and traditions with all Canadians.
Given the strong and growing presence of the Latin American community in Canada, the formal recognition of Latin American heritage is important. This will provide Canadians of all backgrounds a perfect opportunity to recognize and reflect on the contributions of this community. Together we can celebrate our diverse society in Canada.
 Some may say that the recognition of this community means very little to bettering the lives of the Latin American communities in Canada. However, I would argue that the bill is one more meaningful way Canada can work toward being a more inclusive nation that celebrates and accepts people from all backgrounds and walks of life. The bill recommends that the government recognize the contributions that Latin American Canadians have made to Canadian society and Canadian culture for future generations by declaring each October Latin American heritage month.
 I am proud to support the bill. I know all of our Conservative members, and of course the previous Conservative government, have reflected on the contributions that Latin American Canadians have made to Canada. We are strong allies of the community, and are thankful for its contributions to Canadian society. I will be happy to support and recognize the unique culture that Latin Americans bring to the table.
 The bill reads, “Throughout Canada, in each and every year, the month of October is to be known as “Latin American Heritage Month”.” It is important that we designate October as Latin American heritage month, as it is a very meaningful month for the Latin American community at home and abroad. It is particularly important because it is the month that marks the end of the annual season of the independence celebrations in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. 
Designating October as Latin American heritage month would be a meaningful way to remember, celebrate, and educate the public about their contributions.
By passing this bill, we will provide monumental appreciation and support for the community. This is important in respecting multiculturalism in Canada.
We have seen many examples of this type of legislation at work. We can look to Asian Heritage Month and Black History Heritage Month just to name a few. We have also seen Italian Heritage Month and Portuguese Heritage Month, both passed into law just last year, and just recently we celebrated Jewish Heritage Month. The work done in this regard does a lot toward educating our youth in schools and sharing the vibrant cultures of the different communities that contribute to our great country.
Latin America should be no different. Its community in Canada is among the fastest growing cultural groups in our country. According to Statistics Canada, between 1996 and 2001, the number of individuals reporting Latin American heritage had risen by 32%, at a time when the national population only grew at a rate of 4%.
Canadians of Latin American heritage have played an active role in communities across our country, going back to the early 1970s.
It is clear that the Latin American community is rapidly growing in our diverse society. From a community that had less than 3,000 members before the 1970's, over the next decades, the community will see rapid expansion and will continue to strengthen beyond most expectations. According to Statistics Canada, there were close to 250,000 Latin Americans in Canada at the start of the 21st century. By the end of 2006, their numbers more than doubled, reaching over 527,000. It is clear that Canada's Latin community is rapidly expanding and becoming evermore present in our diverse society.
Again, I am extremely proud of the work that Hon. Senator Enverga did for the Latin American community in Canada. I hope to see this legislation pass. As Senator Tobias Enverga said, “Few countries in the world are as open and accepting to people who come from other countries to settle and make a new life for themselves...”.
This is important work for the Latin American community. I truly believe that designating the month of October to be Latin American heritage month would be a meaningful opportunity to celebrate another part of our uniquely Canadian multicultural society, just as we have seen done before.
I value the contributions made to Canada by Latin Americans and I am proud to stand in support of this legislation. I hope everyone in the House will support Bill S-218.
Mr. John Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this evening to speak in support of Bill S-218, which would enact Latin American heritage month. There is a growing Latin American community in Barrie—Innisfil and it is for them that I rise tonight.
I will be speaking about Senator Enverga. In honour of Senator Enverga, I would love to ask the pages for dos cervezas, por favor.
I also want to thank the hon. member for Thornhill for sponsoring the bill in the House, a bill that I believe to be extremely important so that we can honour the legacy of Senator Enverga and what he was trying to do. Of course, Senator Enverga died in November of 2017, in Colombia, while there on parliamentary business. It was a sad day for all of us when we found out. I know some our colleagues were in Colombia with Senator Enverga and are still troubled by what happened on that day in November.
Senator Enverga was appointed to the Senate on September 6, 2012, by former Prime Minister Harper. It was a joyous moment in the Filipino community, because Senator Enverga was the first Filipino senator ever appointed to the Senate. As we celebrate the 120th anniversary of Filipino Independence Day, I know the impact Senator Enverga had on the Filipino community. Shortly after his death, the Bayanihan Club of Simcoe County was holding its Christmas dinner, as it does annually, and there was an incredible tribute to Senator Enverga and what he had done. Many tears were shed that night because the emotion was still raw as a result of his death. I know he is tremendously loved, not just within the Canadian Filipino community but also within the Barrie—Innisfil Filipino community.
Senator Enverga was first elected as a Toronto Catholic school board trustee. He was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012. He was a voice for those with special needs, and what a soft and gentle voice Senator Enverga had. He was a champion of multiculturalism here in Canada and some of his parliamentary work, which is too numerous to mention, included matters relating to Canada's indigenous peoples, oceans, waterways, fisheries, ecosystems, and economic resources, as well as matters related to banking, trade, and commerce. He was certainly involved in agriculture and parliamentary procedures and rights. He was a strong voice on both of those issues and many of us in the House can learn valuable lessons from Senator Enverga and the work that he did.
In his community, there literally was no event that Senator Enverga did not travel to as co-chair of the GTA's Filipino Heritage Month celebrations. He served on the Canadian Multicultural Council and founded the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation. He was an honourable member of this place and he is sorely missed. However, it is his legacy with respect to this piece of legislation that I hope all members of the House will support, on behalf of Senator Enverga.
As I said earlier, the Latin community in Barrie—Innisfil is a growing and dynamic community. The numbers are growing. The culture, food, and experiences of Latin America and Latin heritage are so prevalent now in Barrie—Innisfil that almost every event that I go to somewhere in my riding, there are members of the Latin community present. There are several key important members, such as Nohemi Hernández-Buitrago, and events like the Mother's Day Fiesta and the numerous Latin dance parties that occur. I have actually gotten very good at doing the salsa because of attendance at these parties.
However, they also help in other Latin communities, teaming up just recently with the Innisfil Latin Organization to raise money for the youth of Guatemala who are affected by the eruption of the Fuego volcano, or the “fire” volcano as it is known. It just recently erupted, and many people lost their lives and villages were buried in ash. This community rallied together, raising money for food, medicine, and other needs of rescue workers.
That really is what Latin people do. They come together. They are so strong in their community and in their commitment to the community. The other thing they do is promote ESL classes for Latino community members. In fact, if one goes to the Barrie community Latin foundation Facebook page, one will see a schedule of those summer classes, which will occur from nine to 1:30 on the dates specified.
One of the most disappointing things for me is that there is a church in my riding that offers English as a second language to many newcomers from Latin America, and because of the government's Canada summer jobs attestation, it did not qualify because it refused to buy into the Liberal government's and the Prime Minister's ideology. Therefore, there are some people within the Latin community who are not going to receive ESL language training this year because of the failure to receive money under the Canada summer jobs grant.
The Innisfil Latin Organization is really growing, and it serves as a communication network for the different needs of the Hispanic community in Ontario. They have a meeting point in Innisfil, and everyone is welcome to attend. They support each other, get more resources and tools, and help the Latino community. I can think of one person in particular, Nina Donayre, who teaches English as second language classes for seniors who are newcomers to Innisfil. This is the way they rally around each other to try to help each other. In fact, I was just talking to Nina at the Innisfil beach recreation centre, and she wants to do more work and outreach to the Latin community.
There are others as well such as Yudi Hibbs and Chris Mathson who are strongly involved in the Latino community, as well as Manuel Antonio Vera and Katherine Lozano Contreras, who are key players in the Innisfil Latino community. They do a tremendous amount of work. I have been to some of the dance events they have, as well as entertainment, parties, birthdays, network share job information, and immigration information. This is where my office can play a key role in providing a service and being that conduit to help them out. As well, they have English as a second language workshops and how to keep Spanish in our homes. They do activities for children, provide recipes, and just provide tremendous contributions to the Barrie—Innisfil community. They are literally everywhere.
This past weekend, the Rotary Family Fun Day took place at the Innisfil beach recreation centre and there they were. I know they are going to be at the Innisfil Ribfest this weekend, and the mayor and I are going to be there. It is probably the only community in Canada where we get the mayor of Innisfil and the member of Parliament for Barrie—Innisfil joining together to sell beer tickets at Ribfest. This is the kind of community we have, and Mayor Wauchope and I often joke about that.
The important part of this bill is that it would recognize the contributions Latin American Canadians have made to Canadian society. This is precisely what Senator Enverga thought of when he developed this bill, the richness and diversity of Latin American language and culture and the importance of reflecting upon Latin American heritage and culture for future generations by declaring the month of October as Latin American heritage month.
Later, the hon. member for Huron—Bruce will be speaking about the contribution Latin Americans have made to the game of baseball in this country. He will be talking specifically about the Blue Jays and some of the members of the Hall of Fame. I do not want to give too much away, but it is going to be great.
I have experienced the Latin community and how it has enriched Barrie—Innisfil. In the words of Shakira, “Hips Don't Lie”: 
  I never really knew that she could dance like this She makes a man wants to speak Spanish  
 I support this bill wholeheartedly.
[Member spoke in Spanish]
Elizabeth May: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise tonight to speak to Bill S-218, a bill for the creation of a Latin American cultural month in the month of October. Obviously, this is a heated debate over a very controversial bill, which is why we have six hours devoted to it.
I have been a member of Parliament for seven years. This is the first time I have been allowed to rise in debate during private members' hour when it was not my own bill. I spoke to my own bill, Bill C-442 in the previous Parliament, which created a Lyme disease strategy. For those who are political nerds and might wonder why it would be that a member in my position does not usually speak to a private member's bill, it is because private members' business is usually brief and speaking slots are hard to find. For some reason this evening I was able to get a much-coveted speaking slot on a Latin American heritage month for Canada. 
For viewers, or historians opening up Hansard at some point covered in dust some decades from now, we should reveal that the successive six hours of debate on a non-controversial private member's bill is a tribute to political and procedural shenanigans in this place, and somehow or other, credit or blame—one might say how clever—is to Conservatives, who managed to force an extra five hours of debate on this bill. That is not to minimize that this is a great bill, but I do want to explain why we are here. 
To anyone watching or anyone who cares about Latin American heritage, as I do, there is no disrespect intended, but there are more pressing matters facing the nation. However, tonight for six hours we are debating Latin American heritage month.
I want to turn my attention to that and start, as others have, by paying tribute to a departed colleague from the other place, Senator Enverga, whom I knew. His death was a terrible shock to all of us. He was on parliamentary business when he died quite suddenly, and it was a terrible thing as is always the case when someone dies unexpectedly doing his or her work on behalf of this place. This private member's bill comes to us from someone who did not have Latin American heritage, and that is quite interesting. 
I am happy to support it. I want to say that in my riding of Saanich—Gulf Islands, while we have a very vibrant community that is Latin American, it is indeed small. Spanish is spoken and Portuguese is spoken, but not by very many. I do want to share, though, that Spanish names and Spanish heritage are commonly found in the geography of place. In the colonial waves that came across Turtle Island, the Spaniards of course came. Looking at my riding, my representation is Saanich—Gulf Islands. “Saanich”, of course, is indigenous, from the Sencoten word: WSÁNEC. It actually means “the people who are rising”. 
However, in the Gulf Islands there is Galiano Island, which is named after a Spanish explorer from 1792. There is Saturna Island. Saturna Island is actually named for a naval schooner, not a person. The Santa Saturnina came to the Gulf Islands in 1791. I could digress and discuss the pig war that took place at Saturna Island. It was a hotly contested piece of real estate. It is amazing that it is not now. If there are people who have never really looked at a map of southern Vancouver Island, they should because they will find that where I live is actually south of the 49th parallel and I look due east at the state of Washington. It is a territory that is entirely shared lands and waters. 
Some of those shared waters are the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Juan de Fuca goes way back. Juan de Fuca was actually a Greek, but he was exploring on behalf of King Philip II of Spain in the 1580s. The Strait of Juan de Fuca is one that is terribly threatened by Aframax tankers loaded with dilbit, but that is a different debate.
The entertainment from across the way may distract me from telling members about Portuguese Joe, but this is fascinating. 
Portuguese Joe was the first European to live in Stanley Park. He was born in the Azores in 1828, and he lived in Stanley Park outside of where Vancouver is now. He married the granddaughter of none other than Chief Kiapilano. He really brought Portuguese culture and heritage to Vancouver proper, the Lower Mainland, and in his later years, he moved to Reid Island. He actually bought a chunk of Reid Island, which is off Galiano Island.
He passed away on Reid Island, having had two first nations wives. The first was, as I mentioned, the granddaughter of Chief Kiapilano, and the second was from the Sechelt Nation.
All of this connects indigenous culture and Latin American culture, on which is I want to reflect.
So far tonight we have talked of Latin American culture exclusively in its colonial connotations. We have talked about Spanish dancing, Latin language, and yummy food. Let me just cast our minds to the reality that Latin America is an indigenous place. We stand tonight on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Nation, and much of Latin America is the traditional territory of the Mayan people and the Quechua-speaking peoples.
This is being reflected at UBC right now. For anyone who wants to go to UBC's Museum of Anthropology, starting on May 17 and running until October 8, there an exhibition entitled “Arts of Resistance: Politics and the Past in Latin America”. There is a write-up in The New York Times if members want to read about it.
Those who put this exhibit together looked at political overlay with respect to how politics and oppression showed themselves in the art of indigenous people of Latin America. It might seem incongruous that of all places in Canada, an exhibition like “Arts of Resistance: Politics and the Past in Latin America” is on display in the Museum of Anthropology at UBC.
 I do not know how many members have been to the Museum of Anthropology at the UBC campus, but it is a spectacular place, overwhelmingly devoted to British Columbia culture and indigenous arts. There are a lot of original Bill Reid pieces, carved totems, and art from the Nuu-chah-nulth, Haida, and Saanich. There is a whole range of indigenous art from British Columbia. That is the place people can go to get a sense of the kind of art that is expressed from people who are marginalized and oppressed by colonialism within Latin America.
The connections between Canada and Latin American are not only those found in our shared colonial history, those who have moved to Canada who come from a colonial past. Many people who have come to Canada from Latin America also come from that indigenous tradition. Whether they are from Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico, or whichever Latin American country, they also often come with a connection to their indigenous traditional past, and that culture infuses so much richness into history throughout Latin American.
By the way, one of my constituents, Ronald Wright, is a bestselling author who has documented these connections well in his book Stolen Continents, through his review of indigenous culture in Time Among the Maya, and through a lot of reflection on indigenous culture in A Short History of Progress, although the latter mostly focuses on the foibles of hubris, western civilization, and greed.
I believe this controversial bill on Latin American heritage month will pass, and we will celebrate every October with great gusto across party lines. If nothing else, the bill brought parliamentarians together on a June night in 2018 for the second hour of a six hour debate. This debate allows us to say Latin American culture is alive and well in Canada, and we celebrate it.
 Meegwetch. Gracias. Muito obrigado.
Mr. Jacques Gourde (Lévis—Lotbinière, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to speak this evening in support of my colleague from Thornhill, who is proposing that Bill S-218 , an act respecting Latin American heritage month be read the second time and referred to a committee.
The people in his riding can be proud of the work he has accomplished here in Ottawa for them and for all Canadians. I too support this bill, which seeks to recognize the tremendous contribution that Canada's Latin American community has made to our country.
This bill was drafted by our late colleague, the hon. Senator Tobias Enverga whose work with ParlAmericas moved him to propose the bill before the House today.
Latin America is part of our hemisphere. The region is generally understood to consist of the entire continent of South America, all of Central America, Mexico, and the islands of the Caribbean, whose peoples speak a Romance language or have a Romance language among their various national official languages.
 For the purposes of this bill, Senator Enverga envisaged the widest possible interpretation so that Bill S-218 would cover those who identify as Spanish and Portuguese speakers from South America and Central America, as well as those whose heritage is of the francophone and Hispanic Caribbean islands.
 Using that broad and very inclusive measure, we can see that Canadians of Latin American origin can be found far and wide across our great and beautiful country. In the absence of exact census numbers covering that broad and somewhat imprecise measure, we might estimate a probable demographic well above half a million men, women, and children.
What we do know is that the Latin American community is one of the fastest-growing cultural groups in Canada today. Statistics Canada reports that between 1996 and 2001, the number of individuals reporting Latin American origins rose by 32%, at a time when the overall Canadian population grew by only 4%. Again, in terms of actual numbers, demographers can only estimate that between 600,000 and perhaps 1.2 million Latin Americans, again from the broadest possible measure, live among us.
These numbers are particularly interesting given that there was only a very small Latin American population in Canada before the 1960s. It was in the 1960s and 1970s that Canada recorded the first significant migration of Latin Americans. Their motivation, sadly in too many cases, was to escape social and economic turmoil, dictatorships, and conflict. Most recently, another wave is fleeing Venezuela's corrupt and repressive regime.
 These Latin Americans represented a significant loss to the countries that they left, but they have been a boon to Canada. Their education, their skills, and their adaptability have been of great benefit to Canada's labour market, to our economy, and to our culture.
The top three South American countries with the highest populations living in Canada, according to census statistics, are Mexico, Colombia, and El Salvador. The three countries from South America with the smallest populations now living in Canada are Puerto Rico, Panama, and Costa Rica. Most Canadians of Latin American origin live in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, or Alberta, with almost half making their homes in Ontario.
Canada's Latin American population is young. Statistics Canada tells us that almost 50% of those with Latin American origins living in Canada are under the age of 25. Seniors make up less than 5% of those reporting Latin American origins, compared with 12% of all other Canadians.
Virtually all Canadians of Latin American origin are functional in one of Canada's two official languages. They are slightly more likely than the rest of our population to have university degrees. Also, Statistics Canada tells us that working-age adults of Latin American origins are somewhat more likely to be employed than the rest of Canada's adult population—fully 64% of adults of Latin American origin.
Latin America as a region is considered the fourth-largest source of immigration to Canada. 
 However, in sharp contrast to the United States, the demographic is not measured or appreciated nearly as much as are their counterparts in the U.S.
Bill S-218 stands not only to deepen our appreciation and celebration of our Latin American community, but also to more precisely measure the actual numbers and its regional contributions to our economy and culture. 
Canada's Latin American population is a vibrant and multicultural community, composed of a range of subgroupings. First-generation artists, musicians, writers, and athletes, as well as leaders in the science, health, and business sectors, have led second and third generations that are adding their talents and skills to the mix.
Senator Enverga's bill, Bill S-218, would designate the month of October each and every year as Latin American heritage month.
I will explain the logic of this designation. October is a very significant month across Latin America. It is the month that marks the end of the annual season of independence celebrations from Mexico to Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. October 12 marks the day of the cultures in Costa Rica, the day of indigenous resistance in Venezuela, the day of respect for cultural diversity in Argentina, the day of the Americas in Uruguay, and children's day in Brazil.
Puerto Rico and Chile also wrap up their independence celebrations just before October, and in many other countries, such as Mexico, end October with a three-day celebration of the Day of the Dead, when people honour their ancestors. 
Of course, we must not forget the Hispanic influences in Senator Enverga's own country of origin. Canada's large and vibrant Filipino community, although fiercely proud of the independence won from Spain, which we celebrate every year in my riding of Thornhill, still observes All Saints' Day, the day of the dead, and many other cultural legacies of colonial days maintained among their newer national traditions. 
To anyone wondering what a heritage month is, why we have them, or why we need them, I would say that they are meaningful moments for acknowledging and honouring the contributions of Canada's various cultural communities. People should also know that creating heritage months does not cost the government a penny. It is not a month off work or anything like that. Heritage months give us a chance to stop and take the time to acknowledge and honour the contributions of various groups. They also provide a unique opportunity for cultural sharing. Naturally, members of the community whose culture is being celebrated are aware of their culture and heritage year-round. 
 However, when we have a designated heritage month, that is a point in time for everybody else to pay particular attention to or recognize it, or maybe be reminded that this is an opportunity to learn about and from the particular aspects of a culture.
It is not as practical to say that we should just be aware of all cultures at all times, although in a lot of ways we should. Having these specific points of noting and reminding ourselves is worthwhile as part of that process of ongoing cultural sharing and education.
These heritage months also provide us with an opportunity to note and listen to the experiences of Canadians from diverse backgrounds. In particular, we know Canadians from visible minority backgrounds may experience prejudice others do not, and using these times as an opportunity to reflect on that, be sensitive to that, and learn about the experiences of others is very valuable.
There was an article in The Economist recently about Italian speakers in Brazil. I did not know this, but certain dialects in Brazil have a close relationship to forms of Italian, German, and of course, many different indigenous languages. That diversity is certainly reflected in the Canadian experience as well. We are enriched by the contributions of the wide diversity of peoples who come here from different backgrounds.
Other colleagues have mentioned the importance of October in terms of a number of different holidays and celebrations that have their roots in the various cultural backgrounds from that part of the world.
In conclusion, I want to thank Senator Enverga, as well as the bill's sponsor in this place, for bringing this important bill to our attention.
These heritage months are an opportunity for us to recognize the contributions of Canadians from diverse backgrounds. I commend this bill to the consideration of members of the House. I hope everyone will support it. 
Brigitte Sansoucy: Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in the House today to discuss Bill S-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month. This is an opportunity for me to point out the work and presence of a vibrant community in my riding, whether in Saint-Hyacinthe or Acton Vale. 
As we know, members of the Latin American community in Canada have made an invaluable contribution to our social, economic, and political fabric. The objective of the bill is to designate the month of October of every year as Latin American heritage month. I am proud to support this bill. 
I would like to acknowledge in the House important members of and organizations in the Saint-Hyacinthe region who do valuable work in my riding with the Latin American community. Some of them come from this very community.
It is an honour for me to rise to talk about the great work done by the Maison de la famille des Maskoutains. For 25 years now, this organization has been helping to integrate and settle newcomers to the Saint-Hyacinthe area and give them the support they need to adapt to and manage their new lives.
The Maison de la famille des Maskoutains helps all families, accommodates them and provides family members with support, reference, and prevention services. The mission of this organization, which celebrated its 25th anniversary in February, is to help newcomers integrate into Saint-Hyacinthe and help them adjust to their new life.
The Maison de la famille des Maskoutains seeks to anticipate and remove obstacles that every newcomer might face and help them regain their autonomy as they get their bearings. To that end, it has 51 interpreters on staff and provides interpretation services in 17 languages. Last year, the centre responded to requests from a hundred or so newly arrived families, either for appointments or home visits. The Maison de la famille des Maskoutains is very present in community, education, and early childhood settings, and it organizes events all year long to address themes from different categories of immigration to culture shock. I thank the Maison de la famille des Maskoutains for its good work.
I also want to acknowledge the amazing work being done by the team at the Maison de la famille des Maskoutains, some of whom are members of the Latin American community. I will start with Lizette Flores, the executive director, who took over from Carlos Martinez in December 2016. Like me, Ms. Flores has a master's degree in public administration from the École nationale d'administration publique. She also has management experience in the non-profit sector and does terrific work for this organization. 
Then there is Jubilee Larraguibel, an immigrant services coordinator, who founded the organization Solidarité éthnique régionale de la Yamaska in Granby in 1996. She has been a compassionate and dedicated employee of the Maison de la famille des Maskoutains for 19 years. 
Alvaro Sierra is a settlement worker. His job is to facilitate the settlement experience for young immigrants as soon as they arrive. He meets with families before they enrol their kids in school and guides them through the process. Then he follows up with the child, the parents, and the school to make the settlement process as smooth as possible. 
 Kawthar Ouazzani and Carmen Cecilia Calderon are settlement workers too. They both work closely with families and newcomers. Carmen Elena Serna is an early childhood educator and facilitator, and Luz Dary Marin Morales is an early childhood education assistant. They are both with the children and youth program. They bring a compassionate approach to meeting the needs of the young and old. I thank them for their amazing work. 
It is also my honour to talk about Forum-2020, a non-profit that helps people looking to settle in and around Saint-Hyacinthe. Forum-2020's mission is to attract fresh blood to the RCM of Les Maskoutains through immigration. The organization breaks down barriers to immigrant integration and helps immigrants integrate by encouraging civic engagement in institutions and organizations. It works toward aligning immigration with the region's needs in a way that honours everyone's values.
For the past 10 years, Forum-2020, whose management team includes members of the Latin American community such as executive director Ana Luisa Iturriaga and immigration development and communications officer Claudia Mansilla, has been dedicated to promoting cultural diversity in Saint-Hyacinthe. The organization hosts cultural events on Saturdays in the summer. I am always delighted to attend these activities, which showcase cultures from a dozen different countries and give residents and newcomers an opportunity to connect.
To sum up, Forum-2020's goal is to attract, mobilize, and integrate families from around the world and help them flourish in our community. I thank the team at Forum-2020 for their hard work and wish them a happy 10th anniversary.
Saint-Hyacinthe and Acton Vale are vibrant communities, in part because of the contributions of their cultural communities. I want to highlight the extraordinary work that the Société de développement du centre-ville de Saint-Hyacinthe, or SDC, as it is known, does in collaboration with Forum-2020. SDC has been running cultural events on Saturdays since 2015, where new residents from diverse backgrounds can share their values and traditions with the Saint-Hyacinthe community. I want to thank Simon Cusson and Chantal Lefebvre for the incredible work they do to keep our downtown abuzz with cultural exchanges.
Saint-Hyacinthe and Acton Vale have a vibrant, well-established Latin American community. I have had the pleasure of visiting a number of businesses that employ members of this wonderful community. I am thinking of Gloria Jaimes, a project management engineer who manages manufacturing supervisors at Beaulieu Canada, a company in my riding that is on the cutting edge of flooring trends and is constantly coming up with innovative products to meet the market's needs.
 I am also thinking of Odilso Rocha Rodriguez, a volunteer who is very dedicated to our community; Martha Rincon, an active and enthusiastic volunteer; and Nilda Benito, a tireless volunteer and entrepreneur who created PachaMama Canada, an eco-friendly company that works directly with Peruvian artisans to sell high-quality, fair trade alpaca products. I am also thinking of Jesus Sauce, who works at Penske; Celso Kossaka, Davi Almeida, and Sallira Sanchez from Denis Cimaf; and Carlos Chacon from the Tienda la Fé grocery store in Saint-Hyacinthe.
I am thinking of Lorena Meneses, an outstanding young entrepreneur who is the head of Mareiwa Café Colombien, a successful business that imports, roasts, and distributes high-quality Colombian coffee; John Sanchez, who works for the diocese and welcomes immigrants with open arms; Erick Gonzalez, a sales support manager at Caisse Desjardins de la région de Saint-Hyacinthe; and Angelika Gill, the executive director of Le Phare, which supports the loved ones of people with mental health issues by offering resources tailored to their needs.
I am thinking of Lucie Kablan, a field crop researcher at the Coop fédérée and author of a study on crop production that was published in the American Society of Agronomy's prestigious Agronomy Journal; Nestor Arrieta Bernal from Techno System, which produces heat exchangers; and many others who enrich our beautiful riding with their expertise, professionalism, and passion.
In closing, I would like to take a moment to invite new residents of Saint-Hyacinthe and Acton Vale to a celebration that I am hosting on Sunday, July 1, at 1 p.m. at Jean-Claude-Patenaude Park at Loisirs Bourg-Joli, which is located at 2520 Sainte-Catherine Street in Saint-Hyacinthe. I will be very pleased to have the privilege of welcoming them to the community, and I hope to have the opportunity to talk with them on July 1. Once again, I am proud to support this bill, and I thank the Latin American community for its exceptional contribution to our community and our country.
I look forward to celebrating Latin American heritage month with them.
James Bezan: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise tonight to speak to Bill S-218. I echo so many of my colleagues tonight who paid tribute to Senator Enverga. He was the first Filipino Canadian appointed to the Senate. He worked tirelessly on behalf of the Filipino community but also reached across ethnic lines, which is why he brought forward the bill before us, Bill S-218. While travelling on ParlAmericas business, he became ill and died suddenly in Colombia. All of us miss him greatly and extend our condolences to his family and the Filipino community.
I have a great interest in Latin America. I used to be in the livestock export business. I had a number of individuals working for me in Mexico, and I had an office in southern Brazil. I travelled extensively across the Pampas. Over the years when I was selling livestock and genetic materials, I fell in love with the culture, music, food, and especially the people. It is amazing how many of them have called Canada home. They have left some gorgeous countries, especially in Central America and the Caribbean, to come here and live in the cooler climate of Canada.
Since I was elected in 2004, I have had the opportunity to work quite a bit on ParlAmericas, including three years as its Canadian president. Sitting on the international executive of ParlAmericas, I worked side by side with politicians from Latino parliaments and got to visit a lot of the countries. I went a number of times to Colombia, Brazil, Panama, Mexico, Chile, and Argentina.
They are great, thriving democracies, but they were not always that way. So many people have come to call Canada home because this is the country they came to for refuge. They were fleeing violence, dictatorships, internal conflicts, and civil wars, and they were trying get away from the drug cartels.
I think about Colombia in particular, and how long FARC, paramilitaries, the government, and the drug cartels battled over territory. I have been in the city of Medellin, which is about the size of Ottawa or Winnipeg and has about 800,000 people. At the peak of the conflict, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, that city alone was seeing over 4,000 murders a year. If we contrast that with the number of murders here, in cities of that scale, it is astounding that so many people are killed because of that type of violence. Of course people would want to get away from that. 
Many people came to Canada from Chile to get away from Pinochet, the general who, through the coup and the junta, took over the country in 1973. He was a dictator there until 1990. Of course, Chileans fled. 
We have a lot of Cubans who came to live in Canada to get away from the Castros. First it was Fidel, and now Raúl. We always forget, because a lot of people like to go on vacation in Cuba, but it is a communist country where thousands of people were political prisoners and were executed during the civil war by Fidel Castro and his brother Raúl.
In Ecuador, we had Correa. In Honduras, there are many different conflicts. In Bolivia, there is Morales. In Nicaragua, people lived under Daniel Ortega from 1979 until 1990. He was a brutal dictator, who came back to power in 2007, and even this spring, we were seeing student protests trying to overthrow his corrupt government. Of course, we have heard members talk about Venezuela and how corrupt it is, first under Hugo Chávez, and now under President Nicolás Maduro. Each and every time, people are trying to get away from these individuals, who are committing atrocities. Maduro was using food as a weapon. 
That was something we experienced in Ukraine in 1932 and 1933, when Stalin, another Communist leader, actually used food as a weapon. We are seeing it being done in modern times in Venezuela. We have all these people who have come to Canada. 
Back in the fall, we passed the Sergei Magnitsky law, which Senator Raynell Andreychuk and I brought to both Houses of Parliament. The first name on the list of government sanctions was Nicolás Maduro, the President of Venezuela. I applaud the government for doing that, because it sends a strong signal that these dictators who commit atrocities against their citizens are the target of what we are trying to do under the Magnitsky sanctions. They cannot use Canada as a safe haven to hide their wealth or hide their families, and their hypocrisy, atrocities, and violent suppression of their people will not be tolerated by the free world. 
Of course, a lot of Latinos have come to Canada because of economic opportunity. I think about the Mexicans, in particular. Over 80,000 have come to call Canada home. They are by far the biggest Latino community in Canada. A lot of them came here originally to work on our farms. A lot of them still do as summer migrants as part of the farm workers program we have, with temporary visas. They come year after year, often working in the orchards and vegetable fields, and even on the honey farms in the apiaries. They fall in love with Canada. They love the standard of living they can enjoy here, so they stay. We welcome their joining Canada and our economy. 
The largest community of Mexicans is in the city of Brandon. They came to work in the pork industry. They have great-paying jobs, are making major contributions to the city, and of course, brought their culture with them.
We talked about the music, the dance, the language, the art, and of course, the food. However, let us remember that there are some great festivals. I want to invite everyone here to Folklorama in Winnipeg, August 5 to 18. Folklorama has over 44 pavilions of all different ethnicities. Seven pavilions are Latino. There is the Argentina “Tango” pavilion, the Brazilian pavilion, the Caribbean pavilion, and the Mexican pavilion. Chile has two, the Chilean and the Chile Lindo, which means beautiful. There is also the El Salvador pavilion. We have these great pavilions that people can tour. They get a passport. They get it stamped and can enjoy this fantastic festival.
I know there are lots of great Latino festivals. Of course, in Toronto they like to talk about Caribana, but by far, the best cultural festival in Canada, which runs for two weeks, is Folklorama. My friend from Winnipeg North agrees with me. We want to see Canadians come and enjoy all the different cultures, but if we are now going to recognize Latin American heritage month in Canada every October, let us make sure we get out there and support their festivals and learn more about their culture. All of us will be better for it. 
I thank all our friends in the Latin American community across Canada for coming and making Canada their home. I thank them for coming here and making such a major contribution. I thank them for being part of our cultural mosaic, as a multicultural nation. I thank them for making us a better country. 
I encourage all my colleagues to support Bill S-218. Let us do it in celebration of the memory of Senator Enverga. I know, at the end of the day, that we will be a better country for it. 
Linda Duncan: Mr. Speaker, buenas noches. It is my pleasure as well. Unfortunately, I forget most of the Spanish I learned with my Mexican colleagues in Montreal. We need to work on our languages. I would add at the beginning that I am totally supportive of this bill for a Latin American heritage month, but knowing my Latino friends, they would probably rather do it in July or August, given where they come from. Maybe that is negotiable.
There are more than 25,000 Latinos in my city of Edmonton, and most in the Latin American community speak a minimum of two languages. Many, of course, speak Spanish, but they also speak Portuguese. As I will share later, there are other languages our Latin American friends have brought to Canada. They were attracted to Edmonton, in particular, for reasons like many others, such as good schools and economic opportunity, but mostly for freedom. Many came as refugees. 
As Giuseppe Marconi, the organizer of the Edmonton Carnaval, explained, “Trying to describe over 20 Latin American countries where a language is in common sounds easy, but in reality, everyone is unique, with different cultures, gastronomies, arts, folklore, stories, but we are always looking to overcome the difficulties.” 
I asked him how many languages, and he said that everybody thinks that they all just speak Spanish, but if we have Spanish-speaking friends, we know that many of them speak differently. Of course, in part of Spain, they speak Spanish with a beautiful lisp. It is a beautiful language. 
Edmonton's Latino community is made up of 20 different country backgrounds. Some speak Spanish, some Portuguese, but many speak indigenous languages, such as Mayan and Arawak languages. Over 2,000 claim Latino heritage in my riding of Edmonton Strathcona alone, and over 4,000 in my riding profess to being able to speak Spanish or Portuguese.
 There are many prominent Latino Edmontonians and Albertans. Three Alberta members of the legislature are of Latin American heritage: Alberta culture minister Ricardo Miranda, who came from Nicaragua; Rod Loyola, who emigrated to Alberta as a child refugee from Chile; and Estefania Cortes-Vargas, who is from Colombia.
Sandra Azocar, a renowned community leader, is executive director of Friends of Medicare and is a great campaigner, on our party's behalf, campaigning for pharmacare.
 Ricardo Acuña, a dear friend, is the executive director of the Parkland Institute. He immigrated to Canada as a child with his family, political refugees from the repression in Chile in the 1970s. Ricardo reminds me of the substantial influence the Chilean community has had on Alberta in infusing commitment to both social democracy and the union movement. He has reminded me that Ramon Antipan, also a Chilean refugee, was instrumental in building CUPW.
A Peruvian, a rather controversial Latino, Raffi Torres, formerly played with the Edmonton Oilers. He is now a retired NHL hockey player. 
My dear friend Sonia Varela, and her daughter Maria, also Chilean refugees, have been stalwart supporters of social democracy, pharmacare, and medicare in my province.
 César Augusto Rendón is the president and founder of Multicultural Media and Art Foundation, which has supported projects including Edmonton Carnaval, La Prensa, and Directorio Latino de Alberta.
Giuseppe Marconi, whom I mentioned earlier, is host and creator of the VIVAYEGLATINO podcast and the Latino Canadian Awards Gala. He organizes Carnaval Edmonton, which takes place over three days in the summer in Edmonton Strathcona. He proudly advises that this is the largest Latin festival in Canada, so come and check it out.
Mexicans Carlos Isaias and Bernardo Maldonado are the owners of the fabulous Tienda Latina Argyll Foods, which offers a full range of Latin foods and condiments, also in my beautiful riding of Edmonton Strathcona.
Juan Caroca, is a long-time radio host for Corazon Latino on World FM, also broadcast from Edmonton Strathcona.
Sebastian Barrera, community promoter of the arts, is founder of the CreArt Edmonton school of art in Parkdale Cromdale. It is a free donation-run arts school that provides free music lessons and has completed large graffiti and mural art in the Kinnaird Ravine in my city. My neighbours hosted a backyard fundraiser for his program. It is a very worthwhile program.
There are many cultural organizations and schools, including the Gabriela Mistral Latin American School in my riding. It is a highly regarded school for teaching Spanish to adults and children. It was founded in 1987.
The Edmonton Hispanic Bilingual Association, also in my riding, at McKernan School, was founded in 1981. The Cultural Association Folklorical Mexico Lindo of Alberta teaches traditional Mexican folk dance. LASCA, the Latin American Senior Citizen Association of Edmonton, and Primavera Grupo are Latin American senior citizens groups. LACEN, the Latin American Community Engagement Network, has settlement services, English classes, and training for recent immigrants. It has also partnered with the Papaschase First Nation to honour indigenous culture. 
Venezolanos en Edmonton is a Venezuelan group that gets together. Aculpeca, the Pervuvian Canadian Cultural Association, is also in my riding. There is the Chilean Canadian Cultural Society, and the Latin American Students' Association, at my alma mater, the University of Alberta.
Across the city, and I am particularly proud, in my riding of Edmonton Strathcona, are many fabulous Latino restaurants: HUMA; El Cortez; Mucho Burrito; Àvila Arepa, which is a Venezuelan restaurant; Julio's Barrio; Burrito Libre; and Tacos on Whyte. They are all places to get together when people visit beautiful Edmonton Strathcona.
In closing, I would like to share that for four years, I had the opportunity to work with Mexican colleagues in Montreal at the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, and at every opportunity—every child's birthday, every spouse's birthday, every celebration, such as Cinco de Mayo, the Day of the Dead, or the Day of the Dead plus Hallowe'en—we would have celebrations. There would be a lot of salsa, a lot of samba, a lot of merenge, a lot of music, and of course, a lot of tequila.
I have been very privileged to spend a lot of time with Latino colleagues and friends, and this is a culture in our country that merits a celebration. We still might want to negotiate the month, because many of these festivals are outside. At the Heritage Festival in Edmonton, which is mammoth, and goes on over three days, people will find a lot of the culture of the Latino community.
 Buenas noches, and enjoy the rest of the evening celebrating the Latino culture.
Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville, CPC):   Buenas noches, el presidente. I am very pleased to speak in support of Bill S-218, seeking to create a Latin American heritage month in Canada. The proposed legislation would create an opportunity for us to appreciate more and learn more about the Latin American culture in Canada.
Latin American heritage month was originally proposed by the late senator Tobias Enverga, the first Canadian senator of Filipino descent. The senator, not being Latin American himself, still found it important that Canada would celebrate the amazing contributions Latin American culture has given to Canada. 
Senator Enverga, who was a champion of multiculturalism in Canada, passed away suddenly on Thursday, November 16, 2017, while on parliamentary business in Colombia. He is and was very deeply missed. He said, “The Canadian policy of multiculturalism is a great success when it comes to allowing for, and celebrating, the various cultural backgrounds and languages we have [and we share].” He also said, “Few countries in the world are as open and accepting to people who come from other countries to settle and make a new life for themselves as [Canada].” 
I also want thank my hon. colleague, the member for Thornhill, for continuing the work started by Senator Enverga.
 We are so blessed to live in such a multicultural society in Canada. The Canadian Multiculturalism Act of 1988 has done much to welcome and invite cultures from across the globe into our Canadian family. The measures emphasize the right of all individuals to preserve and share their cultural heritage while retaining their right to full and equitable participation in Canadian society. The act sought to remove any barriers preventing full participation in society and promised to assist individuals in eliminating and overcoming discrimination. 
Canada's Latin American population is approaching 500,000 people. That is a significant number of Canadians who self-identify as Latin American and we are grateful that they have chosen to make this great country their home, and home they make it. Their contributions to our society are absolutely wonderful. Across Canada, there are many Latin American festivals and celebrations that take place and being able to access such a vibrant culture is a privilege that we are blessed to appreciate.
In my community of Yorkton, Saskatchewan, I was able to participate a few months ago in Mosaic - A Festival of Cultures, in which over a dozen different cultures were involved, and believe me, the Latin American contingent was second to none. They bring a great deal of energy, colour, and vibrancy to the community.
Latin America itself is comprised of 26 countries: Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Venezuela, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Cuba, Haiti, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Paraguay, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Panama, Puerto Rico, Uruguay, Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, Saint Martin, and Saint-Barthélemy. The Latin American population is approximately 620 million people, and that is excluding those who have emigrated elsewhere. 
Latin America is full of both human and natural resources. Being up in the north, we have Latin Americans to thank for being able to enjoy things like strawberries, oranges, grapes, watermelon, and much more in the midst of our Canadian winters. We also welcome many people from Latin America to help fill our labour gaps in different regions of Canada. In my riding of Yorkton—Melville, many of the honey farms hire wonderful Latin American beekeepers. Their hard work is such an integral part of our honey and agricultural industry. That is an area where we need to work harder to enable them to work in this country more consistently without having to make so many trips back and forth when they want to spend their time in Canada and contribute to our economy.
Canada's Latin American population is a vibrant and multicultural community, composed of a range of subgroupings. First generation artists, musicians, writers, and athletes, as well as leaders in the science, health, and business sectors, have led second and third generations who are adding their talents and skills to the mix.
As much as our cultures are different, there are also similarities. With some countries, we share French as our official language. With other countries, we share resources in the mining and oil sector, and with most of the countries we do share a Judeo-Christian heritage.
If Latin America was one entire country, it would be the fifth largest economy in the world. It is vital that Canada continues to build a trade relationship with this key region of the global economy, and continues to welcome these wonderful people into our country, with all that they have to offer and all that we have to offer to them. We only stand to benefit from a deep relationship with Latin America. Creating a Latin American heritage month in Canada is a meaningful gesture that signals to Canada's Latin Americans that they are welcome here and they are very much valued in our society.
 I invite all members of the House to join me in my support of Bill S-218. I look forward to Latin American heritage month and celebrating our Latin American community more. 
Mr. François Choquette (Drummond, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to celebrate Latin American culture. Later in my speech, I will explain why it is so important and so emotional for me to talk about this culture.
I want to start by talking about the bill before us, which designates a Latin American heritage month. This bill says that the Parliament of Canada recognizes that members of the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic, and political fabric of the nation and that the designation of a month as Latin American heritage month would be a meaningful way to educate the public about these contributions. It also says that Latin American communities across Canada would be mobilized by a Latin American heritage month. October is a particularly significant month for many Latin American communities, which is why it was chosen as the month to celebrate Latin American culture.
We are in favour of this bill, and we support it. We know that dozens of Latin American nations are represented in Canada. Drummond is home to many diverse communities. In fact, on March 25 and 26, we celebrated the seventh edition of the Drummondville cultural diversity festival in Sainte-Thérèse Park. The people of Drummond are very proud of this event. It is an intercultural family event where everyone, young and old, can dance to music from all over the world, taste traditional dishes, and participate in a wide range of free activities designed to promote dialogue and exchange.
I attended this festival and even danced a little with my wife. As we know, it is Ramadan, and we also got to break our fast that night. This year's edition was amazing as usual. Latin American culture was also represented at this tremendously enriching and very relevant festival. Many communities participated. As a matter of fact, the Regroupement interculturel de Drummondville, the organization behind the festival, has been welcoming and assisting newcomers on behalf of the Quebec department of immigration, diversity, and inclusion for over 20 years.
There are 55 different cultural communities in Drummondville, which account for approximately 4% of the total population. The Latin American population is a significant component of that. Between 30% to 40% of immigrants belong to that community. There is also a large African community. Drummondville now has a large Arab community, including Syrians and Iraqis, to name just a few. We are very proud to have all these cultures and to be able to learn from each other.
Every year, at Drummondville's Fête de la diversité culturelle, the cultural communities of our region set up booths representing some 15 countries. For the first time, Scottish clans were there, including members of the Lindsay clan, one of the founding families of Drummondville. We were very happy to have them all there.
Earlier I mentioned that Latin American culture is very dear to my heart. It is so dear to my heart because of mi querida, mi vida, mi corazón, y mi mujer, also known as my wife, Liliana Moncada Garcia.
She lives with me, so one could say that Latin American culture is alive in my home. That is why it is so important to me. I am already pretty well sold on this bill because my wife, my life, my love, Liliana Moncada, brings Latino culture to life every day in my home and in my life.
Others have already talked about the importance of music and dance to Latin Americans. At my house, Latin music is our soundtrack. From salsa and merengue to bachata and reggaeton, Latin music and rhythms are a constant presence. My wife loves to groove to Latin music. She has tried teaching me to dance, but with two left feet, I find it hard to keep up. In Latin dancing, the man usually leads the woman, but in our case, my wife is the one in charge.
I have also developed an appreciation for the flavours of Latin American food. That is extremely important because, as they say, the way to a man's heart is through his stomach. Latin American flavours are important to me for that reason. I have savoured the gamut of flavours at home and on the road with the ParlAmericas parliamentary group. I have travelled to and worked with other parliamentarians in Panama, Cuba, Mexico, Peru, and Colombia, discovering Latin American dishes such as ceviche and empanadas along the way. I love them all. Regularly sampling and enjoying Latin American cuisine is such a pleasure for me. 
October was chosen because many countries celebrate important dates then. For example, October 12 is the Día de las Culturas in Costa Rica, the Día de la Resistencia Indígena in Venezuela, the Día del Respeto a la Diversidad Cultural in Argentina, and the feast day of Our Lady of Aparecida and Dia das Crianças, children's day, in Brazil.
It is therefore an important month for many Latin American countries and cultures. It also marks the end of the independence celebrations for several Latin American countries, including Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Mexico.
I am also very proud that my daughters, Ariane and Oriana, have had the opportunity to volunteer in Latin America to learn about these countries. They lived with families and worked every day. They picked coffee beans, helped with cleaning, worked on the farm, and did some sewing. They spent a few weeks discovering the culture of Latin American countries. I am very pleased that my entire family has been enriched by this culture and that Drummondville is also enriched by 55 very beautiful cultures.
Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am very excited to rise in this place to speak to the Senate bill, BillS-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month. The Latin American community has always been a strong contributor to building Canada.
 Before I get into the meat of the bill, I would like to take a few moments to talk about the bill's sponsor in the other place, the late Senator Tobias Enverga. It is fitting that the bill would establish the first Latin American heritage month, as Senator Enverga was a man of firsts. He was the first Filipino Canadian elected to the Toronto District School Board and the first senator of Filipino descent appointed to the other place. 
As we all know, Senator Enverga was a tireless advocate for the Asian Canadian community, having served as the co-chair of the Asian Heritage month celebration for the greater Toronto area, and was a director of the Canada Multicultural Council. The senator also founded the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation and was the former president of the Philippine Independence Day Council.
Just this week, I was honoured to attend the annual Filipino independence day flag-raising ceremony on the steps of Parliament Hill, with a number of my colleagues on all sides of the House and the other place.
 Bill S-218 is evidence that Senator Enverga's advocacy was not limited to our Asian Canadian populations, but rather stretched across the great Pacific Ocean into Latin America, which is the focus of the bill, to create a heritage month for Latin America. 
For some people, making the difficult choice to pick up their lives and start over in a new world is never an easy one. In many cases, people leave behind friends, loved ones, and the familiarity of years gone by in search of opportunity and prosperity. These are the difficult choices that nearly all of our ancestors, if not ourselves, have made at one time or another. It is a journey that I, as well as many others in this place, have made. Vancouver is home to one of the largest communities of Latin Americans in Canada.
Latin America covers a huge stretch of land, from Mexico in North America, down through the central American nations, via Panama to Colombia, and down the Andes mountains to beautiful Tierra Del Fuego, in the southern reaches of Argentina and Chile, and reaches from the Pacific across South America to the warm beaches of Brazil. This is not an exhaustive list of the names of every country that is associated with Latin America, but I am trying to give people an idea of the massive geography from which Latin Americans come.
The most common attribute among Latin Americans is the language they speak. The predominant languages are Spanish and Portuguese, where Portuguese is the primary language spoken in Brazil, and Spanish is the primary language spoken elsewhere. I understand that many Portuguese speakers are able to speak Spanish and vice versa, just like many Canadians are able to speak English and French.
Latin Americans have made many cultural contributions to Canada. Indeed, 2018 is a World Cup year. It is well known around the world the passion that Latin Americans have toward their soccer teams. This passion has reached Canada, where soccer is quickly becoming a sport that is gathering a growing following. In fact, just this morning, I learned that a joint bid between Canada, the United States, and Mexico to host the FIFA World Cup was successful, and we will see the world’s best soccer players, or should I say football players, descend on Canada in 2026.
Given this good news, it is no wonder our NAFTA talks have been held up, as all three countries were too busy securing the World Cup. The best news, however, is that we are guaranteed to see our men's national soccer team make its return to the largest stage in all of sport, and I have no doubt the players will make each and everyone of us proud.
Latin American cuisine is also very popular. In any Canadian city of size, we can always find restaurants that offer both traditional and a fusion of culinary tastes. There are many places in Ottawa within walking distance of the House and also in my beautiful home constituency of Richmond Centre, offering Latin American tastes. Not to offend our Albertan colleagues, but if people are hungry for meat, a great option is a Brazilian steakhouse.
In Bill S-218, it is mentioned that Latin Americans and the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic, and political fabric of the nation. This is indeed true. On an individual level, the contributions of Latin American Canadians to our nation have been immeasurable. They have distinguished themselves in all fields of work, whether it be in sport, music, sciences, or even in this very place. Having his origins in Argentina, I know the chief government whip will surely have much to say in support of Bill S-218. 
Indeed, our former leader of the official opposition, the Hon. Rona Ambrose, grew up in Brazil, and speaks Portuguese and Spanish. Former minister of justice and public safety, the Hon. Vic Toews, was born in Paraguay. Not surprisingly, several Latin American Canadians have gone on to play in the NHL, including Raffi Torres and Bryce Salvador.
October also marks a number of special dates for Latin American nations. On October 10, Cuba celebrates Grito de Yara, the anniversary of the start of Cuba's struggle for independence from Spain. I will restrain myself from commenting on the fascination with Cuba some members across the floor have. On October 12, many Latin American nations celebrate Día de la Raza, or pan American day.
I am more than happy to support Bill S-218, and, if the House of Commons so agrees, proclaim the month of October to be known as Latin American heritage month.
Mr. John Barlow (Foothills, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is always nice to have the enthusiastic support of my colleagues. It is unfortunate that my friends across the way are not participating. I am the 18th Conservative member who has spoken to this very important bill. There has not been one single Liberal speaker tonight. It is unfortunate that the Liberals are not participating and celebrating a very rich Latino heritage in our country. It is great to have the support of my Conservative colleagues here tonight, and I thank them for their enthusiasm.
Tonight I want to talk about my own experiences with the Latino community. In February, I had the opportunity to tour Guatemala as part of a delegation with some colleagues and with the Canadian Foodgrains Bank. I wanted to make this trip because there are a number of very strong supporters of the Canada Foodgrains Bank from my own constituency in Foothills. This includes a number of producers, farmers who have designated certain quarter sections of their land where they grow a variety of crops, such as wheat and canola, which they send to many of these countries as part of their co-operation with the Canada Foodgrains Bank. I also have a number of faith-based groups and churches that are participating with the Canada Foodgrains Bank.
 What is so unique and beneficial about this program and this partnership with countries like Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador is that not only are they participating by sending actual commodities and products to help those who are in poverty or suffering from malnutrition, but they are also participating by going to these countries and teaching people how to grow products, teaching them new and innovative ways in agriculture, and giving them the opportunities to start new businesses.
Tonight I would like to share one story in particular. I was in a very remote community in Guatemala, high up in the mountains, sitting in a family's cinder-block house. It seemed like every couple of minutes more wives, kids, and husbands were coming in to see the Canadian delegation. We saw how proud a father and his son were, talking about their new business. They had just started a potato farm. When we talk about farms, we are talking about maybe hundreds of acres. This farm was a garden plot, probably not much bigger than a couple of desks. They were growing potatoes for sustenance and to sustain their community in this very remote area.
I learned from this experience that potatoes actually started in the mountains of Peru. I just assumed, Mr. Speaker, as I am sure you would, that this was a Prince Edward Island or an Irish invention. I was proven to be very wrong. These actually started in the Andes Mountains, and people are trying to reintroduce this crop into the mountainous areas in these communities in Guatemala.
However, they were finding that pests were making it very difficult to get good crops. There was a kind of black mite or wireworm. Of course, these communities cannot afford the pesticides and chemicals that we have here in North America, but they invented their own natural pesticide. It was pepper, vegetable oil, and some kind of wild mushroom, and they were fermenting it in barrels. I am not sure how they came up with that concoction, but it actually worked. It proved to be extremely successful, so much so that communities in other villages around them were coming to this community asking if they could get the recipe.
The father and son found that this was a great entrepreneurial opportunity. They applied to the Canada Foodgrains Bank, which gave them some seed money to start their own micro-business. They built a little factory. They purchased the barrels, as well as the ingredients and some packaging, and put together a little assembly line. We could see how excited they were to be able to start their own business. Hopefully, it is going to be successful.
The one ironic thing I would mention is that, despite being above the clouds in this very remote mountainous area, they have better Wi-Fi and Internet service than we do in many of the rural communities in my own constituency. They were going to be marketing these products on Facebook, and they were building a website. I think we have some work to do here, if the remote areas of Guatemala have better cell service than we have here in Canada. However, they were already thinking that far ahead to market these products. This opportunity would not have happened were it not for the contributions of people back here in Canada. That is why it is so fitting that we take the opportunity to celebrate Latin American heritage month here in Canada, if we look at the partnerships we have built from one country to the next.
I found it interesting that when it comes to agriculture, there is a large export market to many of these countries in Latin America. More than $2 billion is traded between our countries and between these communities. We have free trade agreements with several countries, including Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, and Peru. Now we are in negotiations for other free trade agreements, with the Dominican Republic, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and obviously Guatemala, which has the largest economy in that area.
As we were going through Guatemala, my NDP colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot was also with me. I have visited her riding. She helped me practise my French when I was there as well. I kept it a secret that I could understand French so I could spy. However, we were all there to see the businesses the Guatemalans had started, anything from this little pesticide business to a co-operative of coffee bean growers. Through the support of Canadians, they were able to buy a coffee roaster facility, bring it all together, and become successful on a large scale. It was really exciting to see that first-hand, as well as the co-operation and communication that happens between Canada and Guatemala.
There is another story I would like to share with members about our trip that I thought was interesting. We visited a communal area in a community where a large number of women had started their own business making scarves, blankets, and a number of souvenir items. It started as the result of our having so many seasonal agriculture workers from Guatemala coming here to Canada. Obviously, it is mainly men making that trip over here for six or seven months to help with our agriculture businesses. At the same time, many of the women were left at home trying to take care of their family and also trying to raise money on their own. A lot of these women were also left without husbands as a result of the decade-long civil war that ended just a few years ago. With the help of a Canadian, who provided the initial funding to purchase looms and material, they were able to start their own business, which has become extremely successful. Now they are selling these products not only across Guatemala in souvenir shops but around the world by marketing them online. We can learn a lot of lessons from some of the things they are doing, and some of the things we are doing here.
In conclusion, I want to say that it really is an honour to rise and speak about Latin American heritage month. I want to give a quick acknowledgement of Senator Enverga, who brought this forward. We have a large Filipino community in my riding. I had a lot of respect for Senator Enverga and what he did for the Filipino community across Canada. I want to recognize that as well.
Mr. Kelly McCauley (Edmonton West, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Foothills for his incredible speech. It says something about his quality as a shadow minister of agriculture that he can speak on Latin American heritage month and tie in agriculture and the importance of that community and its product to Alberta.
I am very happy to speak in support of Bill S-218, to establish the month of October as Latin American heritage month.
I am the 19th Conservative speaking in support of this bill, and I express my disappointment that not a single Liberal has decided to stand up to support this bill or to recognize the importance of this community to Canada. Liberals choose not to participate in the debate to recognize all that this community has contributed to our country.
Before I address this bill, I want to honour the memory of my good friend, the late Senator Tobias Enverga, also known as “Jun”, who first brought this bill forward in the Senate.
Born in the Philippines, Tobias Enverga became the first Canadian senator of Filipino descent. He was appointed to the Senate by previous prime minister Stephen Harper. As an immigrant, Senator Enverga was not shy about his love for Canada, and he was a hard-working parliamentarian who carried unparalleled influence within his community.
Prior to entering politics, Senator Enverga served as a Catholic school board trustee in Toronto, and he became known in the Toronto region for launching the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation. He was co-chair of the Canada-Philippines Interparliamentary Group and initiated the annual Filipino independence day flag raising on Parliament Hill, an event we just celebrated a couple of days ago, and one I was very happy to take part in last year, when I was not in committee. It was a beautiful sunny day, and I remember being with Senator Enverga, unrolling this massive Filipino flag in front of many hundreds of Canadians of Filipino descent who were celebrating as well.
Senator Enverga was also an executive member of the ParlAmericas group and worked hard to forge closer ties with parliamentarians throughout Latin America. He aimed to help them strengthen democracy and governance through international co-operation and productive dialogue. He was most notably known for his fierce advocacy for immigrants, the poor, and especially those with special needs, like his daughter Rocel, who has Down syndrome.
I first met Senator Enverga a few years ago, and I knew him as a devoted husband to his wife Rose, and a devoted father. He was also devoted to his faith. He was a Catholic and a fourth degree Knight of Columbus. I am a mere first degree Knight of Columbus, as I have not had time to attend because of my parliamentary duties, and my church constantly reminds me of that. Senator Enverga constantly reminded me that he was a fourth degree and I was just a first degree. I appreciate his commitment to his faith and to his church as well.
In the spirit of multiculturalism, Senator Enverga sponsored Bill S-218, designating the month of October as Latin American heritage month. This is important to me as the member for Edmonton West, as there are over 55,000 Canadians of Latin American heritage living in Alberta alone. This vibrant demographic is growing every year, and we should embrace the growing rate of Latin Americans coming to our beautiful country.
During the 1970s, Edmonton gave a warm welcome to a wave of Chilean and Argentinean refugees, following the military dictatorships that devastated these countries during that period. During the 1980s, the armed conflicts in Central America resulted in a wave of Salvadorian, Guatemalan, and Nicaraguan refugees coming to Edmonton, and there was also one refugee from Toronto during that time: me.
The Latin American community in Alberta is diverse and multi-ethnic, coming from several different areas, such as Mexico, South America, Central America, the Caribbean, and even Africa and Europe. This legislation would recognize the many significant contributions to Canada's social, economic, cultural, and political fabric made by our dynamic Latin American community.
Latin American heritage month would join several other months that we celebrate, such as German Heritage Month, Asian Heritage Month, Italian Heritage Month, and all the other months, weeks, and days we celebrate in the House. Canadians of Latin American origin, like Canadians of other cultural origins, want to celebrate and maintain all of the best of their individual cultures and languages, as well as share them to enable all Canadians to join in the celebrations. In this case, celebrations would take place during the month of October.
As Bill S-218 honours Latin American culture and history, I want to highlight the outstanding achievements of a member of my own community, Alberta's own Victor Fernandez. After I tell members about everything he has contributed to Edmonton, to Alberta, and to all of Canada, it would not surprise me if someone suggested that we have a month just to honour him.
After immigrating to Canada from Chile, Mr. Fernandez joined St. Albert's fire and EMS services and had a remarkable 32-year career as a firefighter.
Mr. Fernandez is a hero to all Canadians and has dedicated his life to putting the safety of others ahead of his own in St. Albert and the surrounding areas.
In 1999, he made a significant contribution to his community by founding the Canadian Aid for Fire Services Abroad, CAFSA. His organization provides much-needed equipment and training to first responders in developing countries all over the world. Under his leadership, the CAFSA has received more than $6 million in donations, including 45 tonnes of firefighter and paramedic equipment and 15 fire trucks.
Mr. Fernandez never tires in his endless quest to better the world and help in any way he can. He has led missions to countless countries such as Bolivia, Colombia, Guatemala, El Salvador, Cuba, and Paraguay. His motto is to “work for the citizens” and “do unto others as you would have done unto you.” He is truly a role model for all Canadians.
Mr. Fernandez's fantastic contributions have earned him the Cross of Fire from Ecuador's fire department. He was the first non-Ecuadorian in history to receive this honour.
In 2015, the Canadian Hispanic Congress and the Hispanic Business Alliance presented Mr. Fernandez with an award for being one of the 10 most influential Hispanic Canadians. The city of St. Albert also declared him Citizen of the Year. 
But wait, there is more.
Victor Fernandez has been the recipient of the Alberta Centennial Medal, the Alberta Emergency Services Medal, the Outstanding Service Award by the Canadian Mental Health Association, and the St. Albert Community Recognition Pillar of the Community Award. He represents what it means to be a steward of his community.
Mr. Fernandez's tireless work in the Alberta community is greatly appreciated and we cannot thank him enough for everything he has done at home and abroad to make the world a better place.
Bill S-218 and Latin American heritage month will honour people like Victor and recognize the outstanding achievements of Latin Americans throughout Canadian history.
There are many Canadians of Latin American heritage who have made substantial contributions to science, sports, photography, entertainment, music, the clergy, and politics, so with my limited time left I would like to highlight just a couple tonight.
Our very own Hon. Vic Toews, who served Canadians in the House for 13 years, was born in Paraguay in 1952. The Hon. Vic Toews had an illustrious career in both provincial and federal politics, holding positions as minister of labour and justice in Manitoba, as well as federal minister of public safety, justice, and president of the Treasury Board.
During his time as a politician, he was a major advocate for building long-term economic security in Canada and creating jobs in his community.
As public safety minister, the Hon. Vic Toews supported the former prime minister's efforts to implement Canada's first counterterrorism and cybersecurity strategies as well as a human trafficking action plan.
He was known for being tough on crime because he valued the safety of the citizens in his community above all else.
Mr. Toews is a proud Manitoban and had the privilege of serving his community as the regional minister for the province. He represented the people with integrity, courage, and always ensured their voices were heard.
Another notable Latin American Canadian is Rafael Cruz, a Cuban American Christian preacher, public speaker, and father of Texas U.S. senator and former presidential candidate Ted Cruz. Rafael Cruz lived in Alberta for four years, albeit in Calgary but we cannot all be perfect, where he also witnessed the birth of his son. Cruz senior is a staple of the U.S. political and religious realms.
This legislation is an important step in recognizing the richness and diversity of Latin American languages and cultures while enabling future generations to learn about Latin American heritage.
By passing Bill S-218, the month of October will be dedicated to honouring the significant contributions of Latin Americans in this country. In doing so, we can thank them for all they have done to help make Canada the great country it is.
Bill S-218 will also stand as a major element of Senator Enverga's political legacy. As this legislation is one of his final pieces of unfinished business, it is my tremendous honour to support the bill in his memory.
Mr. Mark Warawa (Langley—Aldergrove, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I listened intently, and I thoroughly enjoyed the wonderful comments made by the member for Edmonton West. I want to thank him for his faithfulness and hard work in Edmonton West. He pointed out that he was the 19th member in the House this evening to speak on this important bill. He also pointed out that we have not heard any comments from the silent majority sitting across the way. Not a single Liberal member has spoken on this tonight. I do not know why they would show disdain for the bill because it should be supported unanimously by every member in the House, including comments of support for Bill S-218. It is not too late for them to stand up and fulfill their responsibilities in speaking in favour of this important bill. Hopefully, that makes a difference. 
Bill S-218 began with a vision of support from Senator Tobias Enverga, and we miss him. He did great work. The S in the bill, for those at home watching, means it began in the Senate. If it was a C it would have started in the House. The member who is supporting the bill in the House is another hard-working Conservative member, the member for Thornhill. I want to thank him for his hard work and support for the bill. It is worthy of support. It is at report stage, so that means it has gone through the committee process and now here we are at report stage, and very soon, hopefully, we will have unanimous support in the House. 
Bill S-218 acknowledges the importance of Latin American culture in Canada. I am thrilled that there are other cultures in Canada that have already been acknowledged. For example, February is Black History Month. It is exciting that we have acknowledged that. May is Jewish Heritage Month. I am thrilled and want to thank the members across the way and on this side who supported that. May is also Asian Heritage Month. I am hoping that in time for this coming October, we will have Latin American heritage month. 
My heritage is Ukrainian. My gido, my grandfather, came from Ukraine in 1906. Canada was very good to our country. We worked hard as a family. We helped build roads in Alberta. That is where the family homesteaded. I am honoured that as a member of Parliament from Canada, I will be able to go back to that little village in western Ukraine, Biliavtsi, just outside of Brody. There is Lviv, Brody, and Biliavtsi. That is where they came from in 1906. My grandfather was 16 years old when he came. Six months later, my grandfather Danello Warawa came. I will be the first from my family to actually return since 1906. I am thrilled to be going back there. 
Our heritage is so important. I shared that just a little. I hope one day we will have a Ukrainian heritage month. Alberta has one. It got it right. September 7 is Ukrainian-Canadian Heritage Day in Alberta. Perhaps Canada could step up and do that. Perhaps one of the Liberal members, if they wake up and are ready to speak, could seek unanimous consent for that. 
However, we are here tonight to talk about Bill S-218, Latin American heritage month. In Langley, in the constituency I represent of Langley—Aldergrove, every year we have the national cultural festival, and we have all the different cultures represented there, including the Latin American culture. What does that look like? Of course, there is the wonderful music and the costumes, and the wonderful, friendly people. Along with that are the wonderful Latin languages of Spanish, Portuguese, French, and English, all in Latin America. We enjoy the wonderful music and art that comes from that. 
One of my favourite parts of the Latin American culture is the cuisine. I am sure I would have great support from each member in the House in enjoying that wonderful food.
 When we spend time with people from Latin America and enjoy the culture, the music, the art, the food, and the wine, it is wonderful and we can imagine being there. I was thrilled to go to different parts of Latin America and a very small part of Mexico. Unfortunately, I have not been able to go south of Mexico, which is huge country. It is part of North America, but it is part of Latin America. Latin America goes down to Central and South America. It is beautiful and I have enjoyed the culture there.
 Canadians are a diverse people. The majority of us have a history of immigration to this wonderful country. There are great opportunities and I hope there will be unanimous support when we have a chance to vote on this bill. I also want to encourage the government to create an environment where Canadians, particularly new Canadians, can thrive and have an opportunity to share their culture but also to get a good job. That means we need to have investment in this country.
The government has a responsibility to create that environment where people are willing to invest. With the growing taxes and ideologies we see from the government and not even wanting to speak to the bill, it is concerning. How much do the Liberals really care? How much is talk and how much is actually doing it?
The Liberals have a responsibility to speak up on important pieces of legislation like this and to create an environment where Canadians have a future, not only this generation. I have five children and 10 grandchildren. I want to wish all the fathers a very happy Father's Day coming up. We have a responsibility as men and women in the House to create an environment where not only this generation but the generations to come, our children, grandchildren, and their children, have a bright future.
Growing taxes are hurting Canadians. When I go home and enjoy my wonderful community, that is the common message I am hearing. Their concerns are growing that the government is not getting it right. Liberals need to listen to Canadians and they need to keep their promises. They need to respect cultures like the Latin American heritage month. I hope that they comment on this important piece of legislation.
Hon. Deepak Obhrai (Calgary Forest Lawn, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my colleague said that he was the 19th speaker. I will be the 21st speaker. The 20th spot is in between and we thought the Liberals would fill it, since they have not gotten up to say a word about the bill. They have a chance, spot 20, to get up and speak and say something.
I am delighted to support Bill S-218, an act respecting the month of October as Latin American heritage month. 
I want to pay tribute to the bill's sponsor, my very good friend from Ontario, the late senator Tobias Enverga Jr. Last year, Senator Enverga passed away while on a parliamentary visit to Colombia. I travelled with the senator many times to the Philippines and elsewhere, and I know that he was a great Canadian looking out for Canada's interests. 
Latin America is in our hemisphere. It is part and parcel of the Americas. Therefore, it is critically important that we have strong relations. As a matter of fact, we have had a relationship with Latin America for a long time. In my own riding of Calgary Forest Lawn, the northern part is called the Latino village. It is home to thousands of Latin Americans of Chilean origin who escaped from Chile and made their home in this part of Canada. We, of course, always had a policy of giving shelter to those who are fleeing for human rights. 
The Prime Minister said this on the world stage. However, the Liberals are not speaking on this bill. Therefore, I will explain that when the Conservatives were in power, we were the ones who actually felt that it was very important that we had a special relationship with Latin America. To that point, the former prime minister appointed my friend and colleague, the Hon. Diane Ablonzy, as well as the member for Thornhill, as special ministers of state in charge of Latin affairs. They were given a special responsibility to build relations between Canada and Latin America. 
Part of my duty, as parliamentary secretary, was to represent Canada overseas. In fact, I travelled to many countries in Latin America, such as Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Brazil, Bolivia, Guyana, and Mexico. While I was on a state visit to Brazil, we went to Trinidad and Tobago, and from there we could see Venezuela. 
Venezuela is a country I will never forget, because this is where my effigy was burned. It is the only place in the world where somebody burned my effigy. Can members imagine that? The reason was that when former president Chávez died, I said that he was a dictator and a human rights abuser. Holy smokes, did they ever have a demonstration. They burned my effigy out in the water. 
However, we have had great relations. We stand up through the Organization of American States with strong support for human rights, in this case for Venezuela. As members know, before the current government took steps, we had also taken strong steps to fight human rights abusers. However, in the larger scheme of things, we share this hemisphere with Latin America. Therefore, it is natural for us to ensure that we have a solid relationship.
My other colleagues gave the names of outstanding Canadians of Latin American origin who have contributed immensely to the well-being of our nation and for building our relationship. It is only natural that Conservatives put forward a bill to celebrate Latin American heritage month. There are close to half a million Latino Canadians living in our country. Therefore, it is very important that we celebrate their heritage.
When I was the president of the India Canada Association, there were cultural nights. One of the most exciting things to see were the Latino cultural dances and performances. The crowds were thrilled. Before I became a parliamentary secretary and visited many countries, I used to say that I did not have to go to Latin America because they are all here. I can watch them in my backyard or on the stage, because we in Canada are fortunate enough to share their culture. We all know their great culture. Who can forget the great parades in Brazil?
Ultimately, I am very glad that parliamentarians are speaking about recognizing their contributions. Somewhere along the line, I think one of you guys, in spot number 20, should get up and say something to recognize that these are great Canadians. A bit of input from your side would be fine. You are just sitting there—
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Order. The hon. member is an experienced member and knows, which I think he had forgotten for a moment, that he should address his comments to the Chair. If members say “you” or “your” here, they are talking about the Speaker, and I do not think that was his intention.
The hon. member for Calgary Forest Lawn.
Deepak Obhrai: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that somewhere down the line, there will be a few members from that part of the world in the Liberal caucus that will feel compelled to talk. It shows quite clearly that they really need some outreach programs, but we will do it, so do not worry about it. I know it is late, so we can throw a couple of rules out the window.
It has been an honour and a pleasure for me to recognize Latin Americans who have contributed. I have had the greatest honour and pleasure of visiting all of these countries. I was one of the parliamentary secretaries who visited most of the countries in the world and I had a great time in Latin America.
I will conclude by again saying that it is a great honour and privilege to have Latin Americans in Canada.
Mr. John Nater: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am a relatively new member here, so I am not fully aware of procedure in this place, and I admit I am still learning. I know generally that when the Speaker calls on members to speak, he operates on a list provided by the parties. If my understanding is correct, a member can catch the Speaker's eye and the Speaker can call on that person to speak. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if you could survey the other side of the House to see if someone is trying to catch your eye. I am looking for fairness in this place. I just do not want—
The Speaker: The member seems to have learned the rules pretty well by now, as I have seen on previous occasions, and I think this is probably more like debate. I will see who stands and will call upon them.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Saskatoon—Grasswood.
Kevin Waugh: Mr. Speaker, I have been here just over two and a half years. I have spoken many times on heritage, and I am a little disappointed that the other side, tonight, will not get up and speak. Heritage, in our country, is certainly deep in tradition. I think I am the 22nd speaker in row on this side tonight to speak on this. I am a little disappointed. I have a sports background, as members know, and usually when a team goes 22 straight, there is cheering. However, I am not cheering tonight, because 22 in a row is pretty embarrassing for the government, if I do say so.
I am very happy to speak on Bill S-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month. This bill would declare every October to be Latin American heritage month. 
Throughout this country, Latin American communities, as we all know, have played a tremendous role in adding to the cultural diversity of our country, and they continue to do so. Whether it is through music, language, art, dance, food, or even history, Latin American communities in this country certainly have new perspectives and learning opportunities for all people across this country.
According to the latest statistics from 2016, nearly 500,000 people in Canada are of Latin American descent. We know that these communities exist all across this country in cities like those that have been mentioned here tonight: Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. Many people have come to build their lives and make important contributions to this country.
In my community of Saskatoon, the Latin American community is growing pretty well. In fact, the co-founder of the Alerces Spanish Preschool and Kindergarten, Maru Aguirre says that in Saskatoon people can find a job. I would say they could find a job until 2015, but it has been a little more difficult in the last two and a half years, but they can find a life here in Saskatoon. It is a city of big opportunity. He also says that when he moved to Saskatoon from Colombia more than a decade ago he would never have heard someone talking Spanish on the streets of Saskatoon or in the mall or in the parks, but now it is happening more often than one would think. When we look at the stats, we definitely see growth in this area of linguistic diversity in my city of Saskatoon, and in fact the province of Saskatchewan.
Back in 2011, Canada census said 1,400 residents in my city spoke Spanish as their mother language, and 275 residents spoke Portuguese as their mother language. Then five years later, in 2016, these numbers have risen, with 400 more residents speaking Spanish. That's up to 1,800 speaking Spanish as their mother language, and 340 people speaking Portuguese as their mother language. These increases really represent strong additions to the multicultural fabric in my city, which makes Saskatoon even more vibrant and diverse as a result.
Since the 1970s, Canada's Latin American population has grown substantially. People from Latin America have come to this country seeking new opportunities to live in peace and prosperity, as well as the chance to add to our rich, cultural mosaic. Our community continues to share its culture with the rest of the country, and in doing so it makes Canada, let us face it, stronger. People from the Latin American community in Canada work in all walks of life, and share their heritage with the rest of us in this country, in many diverse and meaningful ways.
The Alerces school in Saskatoon, for example, provides children with an opportunity to speak Spanish in a caring and nurturing environment. These students benefit tremendously from this kind of multicultural education, and it is thanks to the wonderful teachers and staff from countries like Ecuador, Colombia, El Salvador, Chile, and Argentina, who make it all possible.
Throughout Canada, Latin American festivals further provide opportunities to celebrate and enjoy this diverse cultural heritage. We have talked about it tonight. In cities like Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, and here in Ottawa, they will all hold Latin festivals this summer.
I should add that in Saskatoon we have Folkfest that runs every August, and it is our major multicultural event. We welcome the Brazilian pavilion, the Peru pavilion is back up and running, and we have many more Latin American pavilions. It is three wonderful days, as the world comes to Saskatoon. Communities in our city are so proud to show their culture, dance, food, and hospitality.
 These are just some of the many festivals that celebrate Latin American heritage in Canada.
We are all excited about Latin American heritage in the country. Before I go any further, I should remind everyone that it was the late Senator Tobias Enverga, who was appointed to the upper House in 2012, who argued that we should have a Latin American heritage month. He was so deserving of this national recognition, and we should certainly be reminded of that tonight. He passed about a year ago, in November, while visiting Columbia. We are all grateful to the hon. member for Thornhill for continuing to champion this private member's bill, and I wholeheartedly support having a designation of Latin American history month.
When I was in Saskatoon with my late parents, they welcomed a Chilean family that had to flee Chile in the late 1970s. I was in grade 11 at the time. I remember my parents bringing the family to our house for the first time. It was in the winter They were with us for many celebrations. I remember my parents' 40th wedding anniversary celebration, and they were involved in it. We opened our house to them and we were better for it. We really enjoyed the family and its experience. We also helped them get prepared for Canadian winters, to which they had a pretty tough time getting used.
I would be remiss if I did not mention Hugo Alvarado tonight. He is an artist who was born in Chile. He came to Saskatoon in 1976, with five dollars in his pocket. Hugo has his own unique style of landscapes, which can be found in many of our homes and businesses in my riding. In fact, I have a number of his paintings. I want to salute Hugo. This past year CTV Saskatoon presented him with the Citizen of the Year Award. It was a wonderful celebration, and we were on hand for that.
Hugo lives in my riding of Saskatoon—Grasswood, and I want to thank him for giving back to our community. He is the co-founder of Artists Against Hunger, a group of artists who have organized a multitude of auctions for fundraisers to help the Saskatoon Food Bank &amp; Learning Centre, the Saskatoon Crisis Nursery, Friendship Inn, CHEP Good Food, Persephone Theatre, and the list goes on. He came, with his family, from Chile and started a new beginning in Saskatoon. Today, he is CTV Saskatoon's Citizen of the Year. It is a great tribute to a Latin American in our city. 
As we all know, Latin American Canadians work in all sectors of our economy. We see it in Saskatoon. They are business owners, teachers, and engineers. It is important that tonight we recognize the value of our Latin American communities and their rich cultural heritage and are a part of the great fabric our country.
 That is why we are so happy to support Bill S-218. We look forward to a unanimous private members' vote in support of the member for Thornhill.
Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to join in the debate this evening on a Senate bill. I believe that I am the 23rd MP to rise this evening in the House. As several other opposition members have mentioned, we have yet to hear a member of the government speak to this important bill.
This bill is important for two reasons. First, it is important for Senator Enverga, who died far too young. He was a good friend of the Conservatives. Furthermore, the House has already examined similar bills concerning other immigrant groups.
Therefore, I have the great pleasure of rising to support the bill of my colleague from Thornhill. It is also a pleasure to speak in French. This is an historic day not just because I am the 23rd MP to rise, but also because I am supporting a motion that was moved by an MP born in England and deals with Canadian culture and Latin American heritage. I am supporting a Senate bill introduced in the House by a senator born in the Philippines. I was born in Poland and today I can support this bill and talk about it in French. That is what Canada is about.
This connection between various continents could never happen in any other country in the world. Here in Canada's House of Commons, we have this unique opportunity to debate a rather straightforward bill among colleagues. The bill simply dedicates one month of our calendar to Canadians of Latin American origin. That is the beauty of Canada. It would be impossible to name another country where this kind of peaceful debate could take place.
The preamble of Bill S-218 states: 
 Whereas the Parliament of Canada recognizes that members of the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic and political fabric of the nation; 
 Whereas the designation of a month as Latin American Heritage Month would be a meaningful way to remember, celebrate and educate the public about these contributions; 
 Whereas Latin American communities across Canada would be mobilized by a Latin American Heritage Month to jointly celebrate, share and promote their unique culture and traditions with all Canadians; 
 And whereas October is a significant month for the Latin American community around the world; 
 Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: 
It is important to read this preamble since it reflects Senator Enverga's intention. More than just designate a specific month for a region in the world, Senator Enverga also wanted to promote Canada. I believe that aspect is very important.
It is therefore an honour for me to speak to the bill introduced by Senator Enverga before his passing and to support it. He was a great champion for ensuring that the bill got to the House of Commons through the other place. The bill seeks to recognize the invaluable contribution of the Latin American community in Canada to the social, economic, and political fabric of the nation. I should add that there is a tragic component to this. Indeed, I would have liked Senator Enverga to be with us today to take part in the debate on his initiative.
I want to take a moment to talk about our colleague, Tobias Enverga. He was one of our great colleagues. He was the first Canadian of Filipino origin to sit in the Senate. He was born in the Phillippines, as I said earlier.
He represented Ontario in the upper chamber, where he was appointed in 2012. His was a proud and very positive voice not only for the Filipino community, but also for a host of others in the greater Toronto area and across the country. He was respected by Senate and House colleagues alike for his kindness, his warm sense of humour, and his unparalleled work ethic. He was a tireless advocate for people with disabilities. He served as a Catholic School Board trustee and became known in Toronto for launching the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation.
We know that our colleague, Senator Enverga, died Thursday, November 16 while on parliamentary business in Colombia. Despite his tragic and untimely passing, Senator Enverga's Latin American heritage month bill does live on. It was passed in the other place, and today, we resume this debate in his honour, which I believe is very important.
 The top three South American countries with the highest populations living in Canada, according to census statistics, are Mexico, Colombia, and El Salvador. The three countries from South America with the smallest populations now living in Canada are Puerto Rico, Panama, and Costa Rica. Most Canadians of Latin American origin live in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Alberta. I will talk more about some of them that I know in Calgary who have made a tremendous contribution to Calgary's civic, cultural, and political community. Nearly half of them have settled in the provinces that I just mentioned.
 Canada's Latin American population is young. Statistics Canada tells us that almost 50% of those with Latin American origins living in Canada are under the age of 25. They are very young. Seniors make up less than 5% of those reporting Latin American origins, compared with 12% of all other Canadians.
I know that MPs enjoy a good celebration. Many of us, on this side of the House, have talked about the things we like the most about Latin American culture, such as the food from a certain country, or another country's signature dance styles. We have talked about a number of activities that take place across the country to celebrate the multi-dimensional Latin American community. A perfect example of this is the annual salsa festival in Toronto on St. Clair Avenue. Last year's event was held on a street downtown that was closed to traffic and, from what I heard, hundreds of thousands of people and a record number of musicians, dancers, families, and enthusiasts came out to enjoy the sounds, attractions, flavours, dances, and colours of the Americas. 
Calgary has a Latin festival. This is a free, family-oriented annual festival. I think this year is the 24th edition. It is being held on July 20 and 21 this year, and I encourage everyone to attend. I have gone to this festival many times. There is also Expo Latino, which is held at the Prince's Island Park and has been running for over 20 years. This year, more than 300 musicians from around the globe will be performing. Calgarians will get to hear Latin American songs and musicians. The website Hola Calgary has plenty of information about Calgary's Latin American community and its achievements.
I would like to talk about two eminent colleagues of mine in the civic community and the political and cultural life of Calgary. One of them is now in Halifax. I am referring to Dr. Marco Navarro-Génie, a good friend of mine who is now the president and CEO of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, or AIMS. The other colleague is Josué Ramirez, who served as an assistant deputy minister in Venezuela's former government. He has always championed human rights in Venezuela. He is a man who is always ready to talk about human rights, what is happening, and the activities that are going on. If a vote needs to be set up in Calgary for the Venezuelan election, we contact Josué and ask him to organize it. Without him, Calgary's Venezuelan community could not get anything done. It is vital to have champions of Latin American culture like Josué in our communities.
Consequently, I will be supporting this bill, with my friends and colleagues in this community in mind. I urge all members to speak and to support this bill.
Mr. Todd Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an honour to stand today and to speak to our colleague's bill, Bill S-218. I know it has been mentioned a number of times. I would appear to be the 24th speaker from this side of the House to speak to this important piece of legislation. Thank goodness the Standing Orders dictate that the government cannot put time allocation on private members' bills because this might be one of the only pieces of legislation in recent days and perhaps weeks that we are not seeing time allocation on. It is a very important piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, you would be forgiven if you perhaps, or anybody who is listening, might have thought that our Conservative assistants or indeed our Conservative colleagues might have colluded in actually sharing speaking notes, and maybe perhaps we wrote the same speech. However, this is just a testimony that we are unanimous in our support and unanimous in how fond we were of Senator Enverga, and how unanimous we are in support of Bill S-218. 
Another part that I was going to mention was I think our colleagues from all sides of the House will be happy that probably they are not going to have to listen to me go on and on about Arctic surf clam and the fact that the member of Parliament for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook's brother received a lucrative surf clam quota from the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. The reason I bring that up is, interestingly enough, when I was doing some research on this bill I found a connection to our South American friends and our Latin American heritage. When I was in Grand Bank, Newfoundland I listened to the mayor talking about the history of fisheries in his town and talking about how devastating this surf clam quota expropriation was going to be, where there is 500 years of fisheries history. It got me thinking about the importance of our senator and former colleague's bill. The reason is that a staple of the South American culture's diet is indeed dried or salted fish. That started about 500 years ago and has some of its origins there. Some say it can be traced to just off the shores of Newfoundland, the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.
 There might be some members who are shouting “relevance”, but there is indeed some relevance. While we are celebrating this bill that looks to celebrate Latin American heritage month and celebrate our connections to Latin America, it is again the good people of Newfoundland who started a fishery and a product that now is a staple in South American countries' diet. That is something we should all be proud of. Indeed, when we move forward and this bill passes, that is something that would be probably a staple at any of the celebrations. It would be salted cod or salted fish, and again that got its start in an area that now is facing some uncertain times because of the minister's questionable decision to expropriate a lucrative surf clam quota and give it to the member of Parliament for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook's brother, but I said was not going to mention that.
Tonight is about celebrating our hon. colleague, Senator Enverga, and his love of this country and his love of all Canadians. It has been said before, but it should be said again and again, as much as we can, that Senator Enverga came to Canada as an immigrant himself. He was extremely proud of his adopted country. He used every chance he had to talk about what Canada meant to him. He was the first Filipino senator to be appointed here in Canada. He wore his heart on his sleeve and how proud he was of our country; we could see it in his smile. We called him “Jun”.
I had really a brief time with him, but I want to bring members back to one of my very first experiences with the senator. As a matter of fact, it was a multi-party event and I had no idea who this guy was, but his excitement and his love for culture were infectious.
 He was dressed in a cultural outfit. He was dancing and bringing everyone around with him. That was one of the first all-party cultural events that I attended with Senator Enverga. As a new member of Parliament who arrived in Ottawa bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and full of excitement to serve Canadians, this was someone that I looked to. I looked to emulate his excitement to serve our country.
There are few countries in the world that are as open and accepting as Canada. Senator Enverga embraced the multicultural nature of this great nation. Indeed, our cultural fabric is made up of Canadians from all over the world. We are all immigrants. Senator Enverga relished the success of all cultural groups as they brought forward their traditions and shared them with this country. The senator used his position to bring about positive change. We heard how he impacted all of our colleagues, at least on this side of the House because we have yet to hear from the other side of the House in this debate.
The senator used his position to enlighten and enhance the very fabric of our multicultural society and in his speech on this bill he outlined the months that we already recognize such as Black History Month and Asian Heritage Month. In his speech he was so passionate about this. He believed we should be celebrating this because we are all immigrants.
These dedicated months open the door to another world perspective for all Canadians. If we lose our culture we lose our understanding of where we have been and we will never know where we are going. 
They help us to broaden our minds through festivals, food, traditions, and heritage moments that bring us closer together as a people. What is it to be Canadian? What separates us from others? What is it that drives us to build upon our shared experiences? It is our willingness to experience and accept difference, to embrace and integrate stories from our past, to learn from the challenges that face our fellow Canadians, and to share in those collective stories that broaden our base of knowledge so that we may collectively move forward.
Senator Enverga's desire, passion, and his championship of all things multicultural were inspiring to all who had the good fortune to meet him. He would say that our strength as a nation, as a people, lies in our ability to embrace the diversity of our different cultures. We are after all, and I have said this three times, immigrants. We all come from somewhere.
 Senator Enverga was greatly respected by the Senate and by House colleagues alike. He was a tireless advocate for people with disabilities and we had conversations because I too have a daughter with special needs and disabilities. He shared his family's experience as well.
He was a co-chair of the Canada-Philippines Parliamentary Friendship Group and inaugurated the annual Filipino independence day flag-raising on Parliament Hill, which we just celebrated the other day.
I was only afforded a short time to work with Senator Enverga and to observe his passion for all Canadians and the House. He was taken from us all too soon and I can think of no greater tribute to a man than to pass this bill and recognize the month of October as Latin American heritage month.
Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased, rather happy, and also thankful for this opportunity to stand here tonight in Ottawa, in the House of Commons, to speak about a topic that I grew up knowing and hearing about from my family. My father was in Latin America, as were my uncles, my grandfather, my nephew, and my brother. The Lebanese diaspora is all over the world, and specifically in that part of the world, which means a lot to us. It is close to our minds and our hearts by many measures. We heard all these wonderful stories about Latin America, about the culture, the people, the food, the music, and the nice weather they enjoy. Everything about this colourful and beautiful image of this culture we were able to enjoy and appreciate back home in Lebanon. However, hearing those stories, we could only imagine how nice that land and those people were.
I had the opportunity to travel a lot in my life before this life, and through my political career since 2015. I have travelled to Venezuela in the past, to Mexico many times, and to Cuba. I was introduced to the cultures in Argentina, and many other places. I know how wonderful this culture is.
 Today, it is a great pleasure to support Bill S-218. The best part about this, besides the importance of it, is that when talking about this topic everybody has approached it with the same sentiment, because it really touches all of us in different ways. 
I wanted to ensure that I spoke to this bill, and I was grateful for this opportunity, not only to highlight the importance of the Latin American people to Canada's culture and prosperity, but also as a testament to the late Senator Tobias Enverga. Many of the members in this House and I paid a brief homage to the senator earlier this week in recognition of the 120th anniversary of the independence of the Philippines. 
Speaking of the Philippines, I was there about two or three weeks ago. We were in Manila. I cannot express enough how many times the name of Senator Enverga came up during conversations. For the 865,000 Filipinos in Canada, this wonderful community that we all enjoy and respect, this one individual was a bridge between Canada and the Philippines. He offered so much in terms of service, understanding, experience, and his knowledge with respect to what we need to know about the Philippines. This is why we respect and understand this community so much, and recognize how much it has contributed to Canada, along with all the other communities in our wonderful country. Senator Enverga was the first Filipino senator. He had a keen appreciation for multiculturalism, and believed that our diversity was one of Canada's greatest strengths.
I would also like to echo the sentiment that I am very pleased to stand in support of the senator's bill. I feel a bit saddened tonight that he is not around to witness this bill that he brought forward initially, to hear those sentiments, and to share with us, as we share with his memory, all of the contributions that he has made to make us understand this experience and this culture that we appreciate every day.
Those watching the debate this evening at home may not be aware that Latin America is generally understood to stretch from Mexico to the tip of Chile and Argentina, including parts of the Carribean, and encompasses the countries that recognize one of the Romance languages as one of its official languages. This encompasses well over 600 million people, in 20 countries.
 Earlier this year I had the pleasure of travelling to Nicaragua with the Canadian Foodgrains Bank. I can tell endless stories about how much I enjoyed that country, that stretch of what they call the“ Dry Corridor”. It rains maybe once a year or once every two years. However, what one sees is more important than nature and scenery. The beauty of the country is the people, the culture, the music, and the food. Everything about that part of the world makes one wonder if there are other places in the world with the romance and beauty we strive to experience.
If members ever have an opportunity to go to Nicaragua, I highly encourage them to do so. It is not far in terms of travelling. Nicaragua is growing and emerging nicely with the help of Canada and other countries, especially from the European Union. One thing is Nicaraguan people are very smart. They are very dedicated. They are hard working. They are trying hard. They want to build and provide themselves and their children these wonderful opportunities. I am very optimistic that as a nation they will overcome some difficulties on the safety and security issues. At the end of the day, they will emerge as a strong nation, a nation which we will enjoy working and dealing with.
I have a respectful Nicaraguan community in my riding. I have a couple of families from Nicaragua that are very close friends to our family. We get invitations every year to visit.
I think there are Latin American communities are in all our ridings. In my riding I had to meet with them in 2015 and 2014 previously. However, in 2015, I had the opportunity to meet with many of them living in one or two of the areas in Edmonton Manning. One of the members has a magazine called Soy Hispano. That covers the communities from Chile, Columbia, Mexico, and El Salvador. I put a monthly article in that magazine. I speak to that community with passion about how much we appreciate them and their contribution among all other communities in Canada.
I believe all members in the House share that appreciation of Latino Canadians. However, it is important that we do not just pay lip service to these communities, but actively support them in their countries of origin, as we do on many fronts and in many places.
A private member's motion passed in the House read in part, “That, in the opinion of the House, the extreme socialist policies and corruption of President Nicolas Maduro” in Venezuela. It is sad to hear about the damage that regime has done to Venezuela, since President Hugo Chavez until now. I speak about Venezuela with such passion because my father made his first money there. I know exactly how Venezuela was in the past and where it is now. We hope we can continue to help these countries and their people to overcome dictatorship regimes, build their economies, and help them to prosper because they deserve that.
We know that sometimes ideologies blind us to what is happening around us. At the end of the day, we know people will win at the end because freedom is very precious, and the price of it is not free. 
Therefore, I am pleased to support Bill S-218 to designate each October as national Latin American heritage month. I look forward to celebrating it with Latin American communities in my riding next October.
Mrs. Karen Vecchio (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC): Mr. Speaker, tonight I would like to celebrate my son's 15th birthday. It is actually tomorrow morning, but I was in labour by this time. I wish Christian a happy birthday. I know he is watching and I look forward to spending the rest of the summer with him. He is also a great basketball player.
Today I am honoured to speak to this bill. My father-in-law Mario Vecchio would be proud of me. He is a resident of Cancun, Mexico. He is a resident of Latin America although he lives in both Brazil and Mexico.
Canada's population includes a large population of Latin Americans. Many cultural celebrations take place, including different festivals and dances. Whether at the Mexican festival in London, Ontario or at the Latin American Film Festival in Vancouver, B.C., there is always a lot to do when it comes to the Latin American culture, including lots of things to do with food and dance.
One of the greatest impacts to Canada is something we see every summer. I am sure many parents here and across Canada go to the soccer field throughout the summer. I usually spend four nights a week and a lot of time on weekends at the soccer field.
For years, we have been inspired by the love of soccer, not only through our European ancestors but also from our friends to the south. Children fill our soccer fields at night throughout the summer and on weekends pretending to be the greatest soccer players in the world, including Diego Maradona, Lionel Messi or Hugo Sanchez. Children run down the field, scoring goals, then raising their shirts after their goals, imitating some of the greatest athletes from Latin America. 
This influence also was highlighted today with the announcement that Canada, Mexico, and the United States will be hosting the 2026 FIFA World Cup. I congratulate all the groups that worked together to put this bid forward. It will be very exciting and great for Canada.
It is just about soccer though. In Canada, we have been impacted by Latin American music and arts. 
Last spring, I had the opportunity to travel with the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development to both Argentina and Chile. Although we were there to study poverty reduction strategies, we had the opportunity to embrace the culture as well. 
In Chile, we were entertained by traditional dancers. Like all other peoples, Chileans manifest their character through celebrations and rituals and revel through their folk dancing. The minister and I had the opportunity to watch some of the incredible performances while there.
Today we also see these types of dances being performed throughout Canada. We see a lot of people dancing, such as ballroom dancing, for which my husband and I took lessons. If anyone wants to see me dance later, I will do that. It is definitely not a highlight. The Trote is a traditional dance of the Highlands. The dancers trot and turn, whipping their hands and scarves in the air. The minister and I both had a chance to see it.
We also had a chance to see the Guaracha Campesina. This dance is a mixture of Columbian and Cuban dances and became popular in the 1940s. The dancers move in time to the music but they do not have any physical contact with other dancers, something we do not see very much anymore.
Then there is the Tamure, which is one of the most popular dances on the island. It has many free-flowing, fast leg, and pelvic movements. The Tamure is an allegory of fertility and it is thought to be related to traditional Tahitian dances.
Food is also a great part of the Latin American culture. Although people from Alberta will disagree with me on this, and I apologize to all of my Alberta colleagues, but a trip to Argentina is supposed to be all about the country's legendary steak.
I want to tell a story about my trip to Chile and Argentina. Anyone who knows me knows that I do not eat fish and seafood. While there, I only ate fish and not eat red meat. While I was on this trip, I enjoyed a lot of Chilean salmon and everything that was fish and seafood. I managed to get through it thanks to my husband, who kept telling me I could do it. I also enjoyed key lime salmon, especially with a couple of glasses of wine.
Chimichurri is Argentina's go-to condiment. It is a green salsa made of finely chopped parsley, oregano, onion, garlic, chilli pepper flakes, olive oil and a touch of acid such as vinegar or lemon. 
Through the arts, we also learned of their leaders and celebrities, including Eva Perón.
 Eva Perón used her position as the first lady of Argentina to fight for women's suffrage and improving the lives of the poor. She was born in Los Toldos, Argentina and moved to Buenos Aires in the 1930s, where she became a successful actress. In 1945, she married Juan Perón, who became president of Argentina the following year.
Eva Perón used her position as first lady to help people and became a legendary figure. Unfortunately she died in 1952. Since her death, though, Perón's life continues to fascinate people around the world. The story of a poor girl who became a prominent political power has been the subject of countless books, films, and plays. Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Weber wrote the hit musical Evita, which was based on Perón's life. Madonna played Perón in the 1996 film, with Antonio Banderas portraying Che Guevara.
While I was touring Argentina, I also had a chance to see her gravesite. It was fascinating, because it is very unlike what we see in Canada, where there are vast plots of land and many people are buried. There, it was a very small compact area. All of the gravesites were pushed together and all enclosed in a cement wall. All of the monuments were extraordinarily tall and beautiful. It was absolutely a wonderful piece to see. Knowing that one of the greatest women in Argentina was laid to rest in Buenos Aires, I knew that so much had been done in that country through the movements with which she was involved.
Now I will talk about Mexico. I am fortunate to have a father-in-law who lives in Mexico. Whenever we are down there, he has us take part in some of the culture. Whether it is the food or hospitality, Mexico is all about the tourism industry. In Mexico, family is the most important element in society and many of the families living outside of the cities are very large. They are very conscious of their immediate family members and extended families, even close cousins and friends. Their families are much larger than here. Everybody is auntie or an uncle and seem to be related. 
It is not only about Mexican food; it is also about the Mexican drink. Anytime people are in Mexico, I am sure a bit of salt and lime will help them with the tequila that they are expected to have a swig of. It is made of agave cactus, which is well suited to the climate of central Mexico. Soda is also popular in Mexico, though I find it very pricey. I also learned that sometimes one just had to do what one's father-in-law says. Although he calls me is his bossy daughter-in-law, one day a year I allow him to tell me what to do. He makes me squeeze lime on squid and swallow it. It is absolutely horrendous. He tells me that I am supposed to chew it, but I do not believe that. I do not think anyone can chew squid. Learning to eat raw food and sometimes living things is crazy.
All of these things we have adopted, food, the dance, festivals, and sports, as part of our Canadian culture. We have taken part in many of the festivities. Latin American heritage month would be October, when we would celebrate Latin America and its heritage. Latin Americans are a huge part of our culture here. I believe I am the 26th Conservative to speak to this bill tonight, which is very important to the Conservative caucus as it was put forward by senator Tobias Enverga. I thank his family very much for sharing him with us during his time in Parliament. He had an incredible impact on everybody and a wonderful smile that made everyone feel welcomed.
In honour of all Latin Americans, let us dance, let us eat, let us celebrate the culture of the Latin American countries, and let us all vote in favour of this tremendous bill.
Mr. David Sweet (Flamborough—Glanbrook, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today in support of Bill S-218 and the establishment of a Latin American heritage month here in Canada.
I would be remiss if I did not begin by acknowledging the late Senator Enverga, who passed away last November. Senator Enverga, of course, was an immigrant to Canada from the Philippines, and was the first Filipino Canadian to be appointed to the Senate. He was a great parliamentarian and a passionate advocate and voice for Latin Americans here in Canada. He is sorely missed by everyone who had the opportunity to work with him.
This bill seeks to establish October of every year as Latin American heritage month in recognition of the substantial contributions that the Latin American community has made to the social, economic, and political fabric of our country. It seeks to recognize great Canadians like Dr. Ivar Mendez, a world renowned neurosurgeon whose research on Parkinson's Disease, and the use of remote presence robots for medical care in neurosurgery, has earned him international acclaim. Dr. Mendez is also an active humanitarian, having established neurosurgical units in several developing countries, and having founded the Ivar Mendez International Foundation, which provides health and educational assistance for students in Bolivia. He is a recipient of the Canadian Red Cross Humanitarian of the Year Award and the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.
Alberto Guerrero is another Latin American who comes to mind, a great Chilean Canadian pianist who influenced several generations of Canadian musicians and who was widely considered one of, if not the pre-eminent music teacher in Canada, having taught historic musicians like Glenn Gould. His influence can be felt throughout Canadian music to this day. Mr. Guerrero is just one member of the Latin American Canadian community who has contributed to a rich Canadian literature and arts scene.
This community has also had a great impact on our national culture through sport. There are countless Latin American Canadian athletes, and I believe my colleague will name a number of them, in soccer, hockey, baseball, football, and other sports, who have made great contributions to Canadian culture. They are not only athletes, but they serve as role models for so many young Canadians from coast to coast to coast.
These are just some examples of the many individuals that Latin American heritage month will allow us to recognize and celebrate.
Equally as important is the fact that this bill allows us to celebrate the success of so many Latin American Canadians and the triumphs they have made despite such long odds, with many having come to Canada in search of a better life or fleeing poor conditions and human rights violations in their home countries.
Throughout the 42nd Parliament, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights has studied the human rights situation in Latin America on multiple occasions. In May of 2016, the subcommittee heard a delegation from the Venezuelan National Assembly, and the picture they painted was quite grim.
The Maduro regime has actively sought to delegitimize elected members of the National Assembly, and has issued prison sentences against assembly members to further its anti-democratic agenda. The average Venezuelan faces a severe lack of access to food and to medicine, with citizens only able to find two of 10 food staples and one in 10 medicines. The delegation highlighted that over the period from 2014 to 2016, poverty was projected to jump from 48% to above 80%.
In 2017, we received an update on the situation by Lilian Tintori, a Venezuelan democracy advocate and the wife of imprisoned opposition leader Leopoldo López, who was joined by the hon. Irwin Cotler, former Minister of Justice. They provided testimony on the deteriorating situation in Venezuela. The situation from the previous year had gotten even worse, with more prisoners of conscience being denied their very basic human rights, and the democratic process being undermined by a tyrannical regime reinforced by its stacked supreme court. These awful conditions have only gotten worse since then.
This heritage motion will help us to remember and advocate for all of those Venezuelans seeking the justice, democracy, and human rights that we enjoy.
In June 2016, we heard testimony concerning the situation in Honduras, where human rights are regularly challenged by insecurity and impunity. Officials from Global Affairs Canada briefed the subcommittee on issues of mass violence and corruption, particularly targeted at human rights defenders and activists.
Berta Cáceres and Nelson Garcia, indigenous human rights defenders, were both gunned down in separate incidents in March 2016. These murders provoked international responses, with our own government condemning the murders and urging the Honduran authorities to ensure justice. 
As long as these challenges to human rights protections and law and order exist, long-term development is impossible, and the most vulnerable groups, namely women, children, and indigenous peoples, will continue to struggle. This heritage month bill will remind us of the Hondurans seeking the promise of peace, order, and good government that we enjoy.
The subcommittee also received an update in June 2017 on the situation in Guatemala from Luis García Monroy, the co-founder of Youth Organized in the Defense of Life. Mr. García Monroy told the committee that government corruption and acts of impunity have led to legal, physical, and political attacks on human rights activists. He told us that Guatemalan government forces forcibly displaced families and criminalized human rights defenders. These crimes are totally unacceptable under international human rights law and what is expected of a government with respect to protecting the rights of its citizens.
The countries and situations that I have just highlighted are only a few of the difficult situations in Latin America, the ones that our subcommittee has been able to study. While we have not had the opportunity to study the poor conditions facing people in Cuba, or in many regions of Mexico, this gives some context to just how much adversity so many have to overcome. In this light, thousands have come to Canada from Venezuela, Honduras, Guatemala, and numerous other countries across Latin America in search of a better life for themselves and their families. 
Throughout our history, Canada has welcomed these thousands of migrants and refugees who have since become part of the very fabric of our communities across the country. Many of these fine Canadians are truly unsung heroes who contribute to our community on a daily basis. They are small business owners, volunteers, activists, and public servants. They have achieved so much and helped us build a better country despite the long odds and suffering that they may have faced in their birth countries. It is through these individuals and others that we have developed such a strong, multicultural society here in Canada. It is through celebrating these communities that we can continue to embrace that multicultural identity that we as Canadians enjoy and are so proud of.
This bill can also help to grow our relationship with these communities and celebrate the positive influence that Canada can have abroad. I highlight the positive influence on these countries that Canada can achieve, not just in accepting migrants but also in diplomacy, because diligent diplomacy can improve the human rights situation in developing countries. There is a perfect example from the previous Conservative government under Prime Minister Harper, which negotiated a free trade agreement with Colombia. Since then, Colombia is one of the only countries in the region where the human rights situation has gotten better.
This Latin American heritage month bill would only further grow these ties between Canada and Latin American communities, and hopefully spur positive relations and human rights development between our country and those in the Latin American region.
I will conclude by once again acknowledging the late Senator Enverga and thanking him for his dedication to Canada and his passion to serve. Latin American heritage month will truly be a lasting symbol of his legacy. May God bless Senator Enverga's family. May God bless Canada. May God bless Latin America. 
Mr. Ben Lobb (Huron—Bruce, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this evening. First, I would like to recognize a former Huron—Bruce resident and former classmate of mine in high school, Shauna Hemingway. She is Canada's ambassador to the Dominican Republic and has been a tremendous public servant for many years. 
October is the month that would be designated. In the areas I hang out, and for baseball fans around the world, October has always been known as the month of the fall classic. I am going to take a little lighter look at the bill tonight and look at the Latin American contribution to Canadian culture and its impact from a baseball perspective. 
First, we will start back in 1954 in Montreal with the Montreal Royals. Who played for the 1954 Montreal Royals? It was not Jackie Robinson. It was a young Puerto Rican player by the name of Roberto Clemente, who would go on to play for the Pittsburgh Pirates, with 3,000 hits, a .300 batting average, and many illustrious years in the major leagues, until his untimely death in the seventies. That was really a great beginning for the Latin American impact on Canada and sports. I should also mention Roberto Clemente was the first Latin American World Series champion.
After that, a few years passed and we had the Expos in Montreal in the late sixties. Of course everyone loves the Expos now. Who was perhaps one of the most famous Montreal Expos pitchers of all time? It was El Presidente, El Perfecto, Dennis Martinez. Dennis played for the Expos. Dennis is from Nicaragua. He was the first Nicaraguan to play in the major leagues. He played for the Expos from 1986 to 1993. Dennis Martinez had 245 wins. He had a 13th perfect game in 1991. His nickname out of that was El Presidente, El Perfecto. In 2016, he was inducted into the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame in St. Marys, Ontario, which is, of course, in the riding of seatmate here from Perth—Wellington. 
Years later, who came along? Vladimir Guerrero from Dominican Republic. He played for the Expos from 1996 to 2003. He probably had the best outfield arm of all time. Sorry, Jesse Barfield. Expos fans will remember a throw that Vladimir Guerrero made against the Blue Jays in 2001, where he picked the ball right out of the air, threw it home, approximately 300 feet, and got Alberto Castillo out at home plate. It was probably one of the best outfield throws of all time. Vladimir Guerrero went on to have a .318 batting average, 449 career home runs, 2,590 hits, and was inducted into the hall of fame in Cooperstown, unfortunately with the L.A. Angels, but of course some of his best years were with the Expos, obviously. 
Another famous Expo who was there for a short period of time was Pedro Martinez. He played from 1994 to 1997. He was the 1997 Cy Young Award winner. Of course, he is a hall of famer as well. 
Then there is the Big Cat, Andrés Galarraga, the big first baseman from Venezuela, maybe a precursor to Melky Cabrera. He played from 1985 to 1991 and had a couple of great seasons at the Olympic stadium. 
A couple of other well-received and well-thought-of Dominican Republic players were Moisés Alou. He had a great swing, and was a right-hander. There was also Felipe Alou. A lot of people do not know this, but Moisés actually played for the Montreal Expos and was a coach in the Montreal Expos system for many years. He was likely their best coach. From 1992 to 2001, he had over 1,000 career wins. That was a great era. Moisés is still alive today in Dominican Republic. 
A couple of other Latin American Expos I should mention are Javier Vázquez and, because it is after nine o'clock I think we can say this, Big Sexy, Bartolo Colón. He is a five-foot 10-inch, 280-pound pitcher, and he is still throwing, at 45 years of age, for the Texas Rangers. 
In the 1970s, in Toronto, that was really the epicentre of where Latin American influence came in Canadian baseball, and probably in North American baseball. There was the expansion. We had the Toronto Blue Jays. There was a new GM, from the New York Yankees, Pat Gillick, and an exceptional scout, Epy Guerrero. It was really he and another scout, from the Los Angeles Dodgers, who started the first Dominican Republic baseball academy, which really put the Dominican on the map.
The Blue Jays first team had three Latin Americans: Pedro Garcia, Hector Torres, and Otto Velez, two from Puerto Rico and one from Mexico. Does anyone remember the 1979 co-rookie of the year? It was Alfredo Griffin. This will be trivia some day. 
Damaso Garcia was a second baseman for the Blue Jays from 1980 to 1986.
We then get into the glory years, with Jorge Bell, later to be known as George Bell, who was a little crusty, but a great player. He was plucked from the Philadelphia Phillies. He played in 1981 and from 1983 to 1990. He was the 1987 MVP, had 47 home runs in 1987, with a 308 batting average and 134 RBIs that year. It is the only reason a guy from Clinton knows where San Pedro de Macoris is in the Dominican Republic. He is in the Level of Excellence for the Blue Jays.
 A sweet fielding shortstop came along around the same time from the Dominican Republic, Tony Fernández. He threw sidearm from shortstop, was a leader in hits, played two times. He is in the Level of Excellence and a great guy.
Probably the best Blue Jay of all time to ever play was Robbie Alomar, from Puerto Rico. He was a hall of famer from 1991 to 1995, had 10 Gold Gloves, 12 All-Stars. He is in the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame. He is in Cooperstown. He hit 300 for a career, with over 27 hits and almost 500 stolen bases.
Does anyone remember Bam Bam, Carlos Delgato, from Puerto Rico? He was Level of Excellence. He should have been in the Hall of Fame as well. He had over 400 homers and 1,500 RBIs.
The latest two or three were José Bautista and Edwin Encarnación. Who can forget those two? Honourable mention: does anyone remember Juan Guzman, Manny Lee, Alex Rios, and Junior Felix?
Today's excellent Latin American Blue Jays include Teoscar Hernández, Marco Estrada, when he can get the change-up over, and Jaimie García, when he remembers to throw strikes. Who is the crown jewel of Latin American baseball today? It is Vladimir Guerrero, Jr. Who can forget the walk-off home run in Montreal in April, one of the most memorable home runs in Canadian history? Maybe it was not quite as much as Joe Carter's, but Joe was not born in Latin America.
I think back to some of the journalists who have covered the Jays through the years: Stephen Brunt, Jeff Blair, Richard Griffin, and Bob Elliott. I would love to hear all their thoughts.
Some of the all-time greats from the Dominican Republic are David “Big Papi” Ortiz, Manny Ramirez, Adrian Beltre, and Julio Franco.
From Colombia are Edgar Renteria and Orlando Cabrera.
From Panama is Mariano Rivera.
From Mexico, does anyone remember “El Toro”, Fernando Valenzuela, who is 60 years old, and Fernandomania, from the 1980s?
I want to go through a few more.
From Venezuela there is José Altuve, Elvis Andrus, Félix Hernández, Victor Martinez, Bobby Abreu, Andres Galarraga, Miguel Cabrera, and Adrián Beltré.
From Cuba, because they are able to come across now and play, there is Jose Abreu, Aroldis Chapman, and his 106-mile-an-hour fastball, Yoenis Céspedes, and Yasiel Puig. How is my pronunciation in Spanish?
I should also mention that I played a couple of years of collegiate baseball in Tennessee, and many of my teammates were from Puerto Rico. There was Alex Colon and Ramon Lopez. I forget some of them now, it has been so many years. This haircut is a dead giveaway. There was Danny Alvarez and Enrique Lazu. I have so many great memories. 
Let us make no mistake, some of these were the greats of all time. They put Canadian baseball on the map. God bless Latin America.
Mr. Alupa Clarke (Beauport—Limoilou, CPC): Mr. Speaker, seriously, it is almost embarrassing to have to follow my colleague from Huron—Bruce, who listed many athletes of Latin American heritage living in Canada and North America who have accomplished amazing things in baseball, football, hockey, and soccer. I loved his fantastic presentation and his fine speech. 
As usual, I would like to begin by saying hello to all my constituents in Beauport—Limoilou, many of whom are listening this evening, I am sure. 
I am very proud to participate in this debate on Bill S-218, which was introduced in the other place by our valiant and very honourable colleague, Senator Enverga, who sadly passed away over a year ago. God rest his soul. Our colleague from Thornhill is now sponsoring this bill in the House of Commons. 
The Liberals are not participating in tonight's debate, which is unfortunate. As a number of my colleagues have pointed out this evening, there are more than half a million people of Hispanic American heritage living in Canada. They have an incredible history, and they play an extraordinary role in our society in many different ways. It is therefore important to talk about the cultural, political, and economic contributions they have made to our country. 
I would like to point out that Quebec City is no exception in that regard. Quebec City is home to a large Colombian community, and every year, they host a wonderful fiesta in Beauport Bay, in my riding. I am sure it will be happening again this summer.
I would like to make a comparison and share it with all the members of the House this evening. I would actually like to talk about some of the similarities that unite North America and South America. There are historical, political, geopolitical, economic, sociological, and even anthropological similarities. It is, after all, the Americas. We share two continents and a very common history. 
First of all, from an anthropological perspective, this is an important debate, and there are several theories. There is the Clovis First theory, which holds that nomadic peoples came from Asia via the Bering Strait about 10,000 years ago and populated all of America. As a result, the first settlers in North America or South America would have been descendants of those same nomadic peoples from Asia. There are also counter-theories that claim they arrived via the Pacific coast 30,000 years ago. Regardless, the two continents certainly share similarities, anthropologically speaking.
We also share similar histories. This is the New World. Christopher Columbus landed near Cuba, if I am not mistaken. At the time, he discovered the Americas on behalf of the Europeans. He discovered the New World. Jacques Cartier, Jean Cabot, and all those explorers revealed the existence of new, albeit already inhabited, lands to all of humanity, meaning Europeans, philosophers, writers, explorers, and monarchs. They discovered vast lands that were then colonized. We know the history. One very tangible historical legacy that both North America and South America share is colonialism. Conquistadors from South America conquered Central America and even parts of California and Florida, all the way to Tierra del Fuego in South America.
There were the colonialists in New France, which is where I am from, and in New England. Once again, we share similar histories and experiences with colonialism. 
Another aspect of our shared history is the earliest form of modern capitalism: mercantilism. In this triangular trade, Europeans sailed to Africa to acquire slaves and brought resources back to England on the same ships. It was all deeply tragic, of course, but it is a historical fact. We must not fear history. Mercantilism is another thing we have in common with South America.
 From a geopolitical perspective, it is interesting to note that, around the same time, in the 15th, 16th, or 17th century, South America was divided in two by the pope, though I do not remember which one. The pope divided South America into two vast geopolitical regions, one Portuguese and the other Spanish. 
In North America, the treaty that ended the Seven Years' War divided the territory between the British and the French, so from a geopolitical perspective, we have that part of our history in common with South America. 
From a political and sociological point of view, there are people's revolutions, such as the American Revolution of 1776. Canada never really had a revolution, but the Patriotes did kill people and spark revolutionary movements that led to ministerial responsibility in Canada. That was a kind of people's revolution.
In South America, Simón Bolívar strove to build a continent-wide federation called Gran Colombia. He even became a dictator. Some commentators portray him as a liberal who became a dictator. Anyway, there were people's revolutions in both North America and South America. That is something else we have in common with the people of Latin America.
Furthermore, economically speaking, we share a willingness with these people to trade between countries and reduce borders when it comes to tariffs and even the sharing of cultures and political systems. In North America, we have NAFTA, which was created in 1988 and ratified in 1992. South America has an equivalent, Mercosur, which was created in 1991 and ratified in 1995.
These two agreements share a similar economic annexation model, but the Latin American countries go a step further because they try to share best policy practices and standardize their social policies, which is no easy feat considering that some South American countries are not quite what we could call democratic. 
I would also like to talk about Canada's relationship with South America. Canada was late in discovering South America for one very simple reason. In 1823, Republican American President Monroe implemented the Monroe doctrine, which was very important over the next two centuries. In one of the speeches he gave to Congress, President Monroe told Europeans that all of the Americas were under American imperial control. In other words, Mr. Monroe told the European powers that any European designs on the Americas would be regarded as nothing less than a hostile attack on the United States.
From that point on, the United States started treating South America like their back yard. We saw that in the way they behaved toward Chile, in the days of Pinochet, and in Honduras, when Mr. Reagan brought down that country's government. The Americans treated South America like their back yard.
Here, as great economic and political allies of the United States, we kept our distance from South America because the Americans would not have been happy to see Canada try to foster agreements or diplomatic relations with South American countries since that was their back yard. 
All that changed in 1984 with the creation of the Organization of American States, which Canada did not join until 1990. It took all that time for Canada to open up to South American countries because of the Monroe doctrine. It was only in 1990 that Canada, after 30 years of observer status, became a full fledged member state.
Today, after more than 28 years as a member of the OAS, Canada does interesting work exporting its democratic values to South American countries and creating bilateral free trade agreements, including with Peru. That was one of Mr. Harper's many fine accomplishments. There are also the summits of the Americas, including the one that was held in Quebec City in 2001. 
That is what I wanted to present this evening. In North America and in South America, we have our particularities and we share some very real similarities on economic, geopolitical, sociological, anthropological and historical levels. In Canada, we are pleased that a growing number of Hispanics are heading to our border to immigrate to our country in order to participate in our beautiful cultural, political, and economic life.
Canada was closed to South America for a very long time because of the Monroe doctrine and U.S. policy, which jealously treated South America as its backyard.
Hurray for Senator Enverga's initiative. Hurray for the initiative of my colleague from Thornhill, who sponsored the bill. Hurray for the Columbian community in Quebec City, which is going to party this summer in Baie de Beauport in my riding. 
Hon. Ed Fast (Abbotsford, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed listening to the various interventions on this private member's bill, one which recognizes Canada's relationship with Latin America and the ties we have to many of the countries in that region of the world, establishing the recognition, at law, that the relationship between Canadians and their Latin American partners is a very good one and that can lead to prosperity and to wonderful relationships.
I heard discussion about sports here today, and the culture of Latin America, but I would like to focus today on a thing that has been my passion for a number of years now, and that is international trade. As Canada's former international trade minister, I had the honour and privilege of being able to lead Canada's trade agenda all around the world. We brought in the global markets action plan, which opens up new markets for Canadians who are looking to export their goods all around the world. We also saw in trade an opportunity not only to drive Canadian prosperity, but to help other countries around the world improve their own prosperity. There are some who believe that trade is a zero-sum game: if they win, we lose; if we win, they lose. We have leaders in the world today, very well-known leaders, who believe that trade is a zero-sum game and are prepared to lose opportunities to build trading relationships that are going to drive their own economic growth. 
We as a Conservative Party strongly believe that trade is not a zero-sum game, that in fact a rising tide lifts all ships. To put it another way, when we increase the size of the pie, everybody benefits, everybody can participate, and everybody can become more prosperous. That is what generated our enthusiasm for engaging in trade with Latin America. It was our Conservative government under Stephen Harper that led the charge to really seize the opportunity to engage with countries within Latin America. We engaged with countries like Panama and Honduras. We engaged with countries like Peru and Colombia. We also made attempts to engage with some of the larger economies in South America like Argentina and Brazil, and I will get to those in a moment. What drove us was not only a motive to drive economic growth in Canada through trade, but it was to be a vehicle that could be used to help other countries that were emerging from very troubled histories, very troubled pasts.
I will give an example of where Canada has engaged. By the way, this is also a compliment to our Liberals here because they are the ones who started the trade negotiations with Chile. I give credit where credit is due. What happened was that Chile under Augusto Pinochet lived in fear, under the oppression of a tyrant and a dictator who oppressed his people. There was no democracy. There was no security in that country. There was no rule of law. It was chaotic. It was immensely unsafe. Those who remember those days remember the news reports coming out of Chile: extra-judicial killings; and people, fathers and mothers, disappearing, never to be seen again. Eventually, Augusto Pinochet was deposed. He was brought to justice. The country was in shambles. The economy was in shambles. Canada decided to engage with Chile. There are those who suggest that with countries that come from very problematic pasts like Colombia, Peru, and Honduras, the best way of treating them is as pariahs and not to engage with them at all; isolate them.
Canada's approach has been quite different. We have said, provided a country has a genuine desire to emerge from its difficult past and to make the structural reforms required, we are prepared to engage with it on trade. When we engage on trade, we get to engage on building democratic institutions, building the rule of law, delivering better security in those countries. It is all part of a package. It is not just about trade.
 We engage with Chile and Canada was one of the first countries to sign a trade agreement with Chile. Today, Chile is the most prosperous, most democratic country in South America. It is a shining example of where engagement made a huge difference. Even to this day, Canada has close relationships with Chile. We still have a trade agreement with it.
There are other countries in the region. Peru was one. It was trying to loosen itself from the grip of the Shining Path guerrillas, who were wreaking chaos throughout the country. Eventually it was able to emerge from that and its leader at the time chose to engage with Canada and asked if it would be possible for Canada to consider a trade agreement with Peru. We said we knew they had a troubled past and there were lots of things to fix in their country, but they had expressed a genuine desire to create a much better country, a much better economy, and a much better future for the people. We engaged with Peru. We negotiated a trade agreement. Today, Peru is a completely different country. It still has its challenges and anyone who travels there will understand that, but it is a vastly different and superior country to what it once was.
The same thing is true with Colombia where we engaged with President Santos, who was trying to make peace with the FARC guerillas and the ELN, the national patriotic army. We said we would engage with it on a trade agreement and we negotiated. At the end of the day we were able to secure an agreement that is today helping to drive prosperity with that country because there are other countries that Colombia has now engaged with as well and has trade agreements with. It is strengthening its democratic institutions. It has a semblance of rule of law in Colombia. Is it perfect? No, but it is getting much better. Canada played a part in doing that, in providing security, developing capacity within that country.
Canada is known around the world as being a kinder, gentler nation. Countries that are coming out of a troubled past find it much easier to engage with Canada than with other countries because we have a different approach. For example, some trade agreements have to be negotiated on asymmetrical bases, in other words, the outcomes are not the same on both sides. We recognize that one partner is weaker and instead of saying it is our way or the highway, we want full access to a market overnight, Canada has an approach that says over time they are going to develop a much more prosperous country, but for now we want to engage and we are going to set up a set of rules that favour the other country for the time being. Over time, they can catch up and we will have a full-blown bilateral agreement that is truly balanced.
That is the kind of approach that Canadians brought to trade, that we have brought to Latin America. We have made a huge difference as we have engaged with those countries. There are other countries that we still have to engage with, countries like Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Paraguay, Uruguay. They are all part of something called Mercosur. Actually Venezuela is not part of it, given its recent challenges, but the other countries are part of a larger trading bloc that Canada has tried to engage with. The problem is that many of those countries still believe that trade is a zero-sum game, so that if one wins, the other loses. They are very protectionist. They really do not want to open up their economies, but they want to open up our economy. It has to be a two-way street, we understand that.
I hope I have been able to paint a bit of a picture of Latin America. It is not just about sports, it is not just about culture, it is about economic opportunity, it is about trade, and making the lives of millions of people better, and ensuring prosperity for them.
Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I was excited to hear my colleague's speech about trade, because we believe in the impacts of trade, and the great benefits of it. His examples were phenomenal when he talked about how we can watch countries rise and gain an advantage in every area when they embrace things like free trade, and set aside protectionism and trade barriers for their country. Therefore, we are excited to be here tonight and to hear some of the examples where that has worked around the world.
There are two aspects that I want to talk about tonight. One has to do with the bill on Latin America. The other one has to do with the Filipino community in our country and the role that it plays, because Senator Enverga was such an important part of that. I want to talk a bit about him and his phenomenal impact on that community and his adopted country.
My riding is in southwestern Saskatchewan. We had not had a lot of Filipino people in our riding until about 10 years ago when the temporary foreign worker program was put into place, the Saskatchewan immigrant nominee program was put into place, and people began to come into southwestern Saskatchewan and fill roles in manufacturing, in some of the service industries, and so forth. They have become a major community in southwestern Saskatchewan. It is a community that makes a huge contribution to our community as well. It is interesting that they have gone from just a few hundred people to between 2,000 and 3,000 people in that community in southwestern Saskatchewan. They support each other. Swift Current is the centre of our community in that part of the area, and they are great contributors to the local economy and the local communities. They are great partners. They just fit right in. They have such a strong family focus that it is a reminder to the rest of us to continue to focus on supporting our families and the relationships there. They have provided great leadership in our community in Saskatchewan. However, Senator Enverga certainly provided that leadership here in Ontario, and I would like to talk a bit about the role that he played.
I did not know him all that well. However, sometimes we have the opportunity to meet people and as soon as we see them and spend a bit of time with them we understand that they are people who have a lot of influence because they are willing to commit themselves to other people. He was one of those people. It was obvious he was a man who loved his country. He loved Canada. He was a tireless worker. He was passionate about the projects he was involved in. He was full of energy all the time. I think probably few of us are that enthusiastic about our country. It certainly is a reminder to us that we can play that kind of role of really bringing people up with us.
 As was mentioned earlier this evening, he was the first Filipino on the Toronto Catholic District School Board. I saw some tributes to him after his passing from people who said that he played such an influential role in their lives even to this day because of the things he initiated and the relationships he had with them.
 Of course, he was more famous in his role as a senator. He was appointed in 2012. He came in and played an important role. What is interesting is that he was not in the Senate a long time, but when he passed away the Speaker of the Senate had this to say about him: 
 In every aspect of his parliamentary work, Senator Enverga was not shy about sharing his deep love for Canada. It has been a privilege to serve with him and I know he will be dearly missed by everyone in the Senate family. 
Sometimes we say those kinds of words if someone has passed away. However, from what I can see, every person who knew him felt that way about him, and had a deep appreciation for who he was and what he had done. Therefore, we need to recognize his service in the other place.
He was somebody who loved others as well. He was very committed to his community. He worked for 30 years I think for the Bank of Montreal. He was a strong family man. He was a fierce advocate for people with disabilities. That may be tied to the fact that one of his daughters has Down's syndrome. When we meet parents who have a child with a disability, often there is a deep compassion not only for their children but for other children in similar situations and for their parents. Senator Enverga was one of those people who had that depth of character from serving his family.
Senator Enverga was a person who was loved in his community. He launched the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation, which had a lot to do with trying to help both the new families coming to Canada and those in the Philippines in situations where there were disasters and those kinds of things. 
He talked at one point about having the opportunity to be in the Senate. He said:
 The Senate has come to bolster representation of groups often under-represented in Parliament, such as Aboriginal peoples, visible minorities and women. We, as visible minorities and Asian senators, have a responsibility and the ability to share and contribute our unique values, skills, and culture to complement and enhance various Senate roles and duties for the country as a whole. 
This is a person who not only loved his country but loved the people around him, and he was willing to work for them as well.
There was an interesting anecdote. He was a person who went to church regularly, and often people wondered if they could talk to him about some of the roles he could play here and some ways he might help them. He was always available after church on Sunday if people wanted to talk to him. Some of us tend to run away and hide when we are in public so that we do not have to work 24 hours a day. Senator Enverga was someone who was happy to greet people and bring them into his life.
He was also a person who loved God, and he was not shy about that. One of the things I appreciated most was the comments from his wife after his passing about his character. They had been married for 34 years, and she described her husband as a person with a heart for those who needed help. Her words were that his drive and focus had always been rooted in his “fervent Catholic faith.” He was always a man of faith, and who he was was rooted in that. He believed in putting his community ahead of himself, so it is not a surprise that he had the kind of influence he did in our country. His wife also said, “My husband would want to tell everyone, please stand up for your faith.... No matter what you do, no matter what position you have, stand up for your faith.”
He was a person who was not ashamed of that. He was willing to take that with him into his life here. He certainly had a significant impact on a lot of people around here, and we are aware of that. I have done a lot of work on international religious freedom, and he reminded me of other people I have met who are willing to pay a tremendous price because of the things they believe in and the things they hold dear. 
Time goes too quickly with these speeches, but it does in other places as well, and Senator Enverga clearly left us far too early. He still had things to do. He had a couple of bills before the House, such as Bill S-242, which would protect consumers. He was working on the bill before us, Bill S-218, and he was trying to bring the singing of the national anthem once a week into the Senate as well. 
I will close by reading a tribute from his friend, Romy Rafael, who is the president of the foundation he started:
 His passion and drive to help those in need, especially in their time of need shown in his involvement in numerous charitable causes and this is how the PCCF came to be. Before being appointed to the senate by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, he created the PCCF in October 2010, in order to help the poorest of the poor in the Philippines. He was a selfless man who loved his country and genuinely wanted to help the people in it. He was determined to help. He once said in his speech: “We are not afraid to fail”. We may fall, stumble and cry, but we will stand up stronger and fulfill our mission to charity. By his example, he inspired people, like myself, to be an advocate for positive change and to help those in need. 
He finished by saying:
 There is a saying that goes: “people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel”. Even though you are no longer with us, your spirit will live on through those whose lives you touched. Your legacy will continue and you will forever be in our hearts. May you Rest in Peace Senator. We will miss you. 

Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red Deer—Mountain View, CPC): Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to support Bill S-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month. 
My colleague from Cypress Hills—Grasslands spoke so eloquently about Senator Enverga. I, too, will speak to some of great things that he meant to this place and to his community. 
Many of our colleagues have mentioned that this bill is one of the many lasting legacies of our friend and colleague, the late Senator Tobias Enverga. Bill S-218 also owes its continued success in this chamber to the tireless efforts of our colleague from Thornhill.
Senator Enverga was a tireless champion of the many cultural and ethnic groups that now call Canada home. As an immigrant himself, he knew the challenges of starting a new life in a foreign country. As a senator, he was always quick to acknowledge the hard work, dedication, and enormous contributions of new Canadians as they settled into their new lives here in Canada.
Senator Enverga first brought this bill forward in the Senate. He had a similar bill before the House in the last Parliament, which was dropped because of the election in 2015. For the current iteration, the senator wanted to reshape it and expand it to include a few more important things. The original bill was called Hispanic heritage month. For Bill S-218, he consciously changed the name and the characterization to Latin American heritage month. 
In previous speeches and debates on this bill, the late senator referenced other heritage months that moved him to propose one for Canadians of Latin American descent.
When Senator Enverga first spoke to Bill S-218, he reminded colleagues that he came to Canada as an immigrant, one of many in the upper chamber fortunate to have been welcomed in Canada. He referred to the spectrum of celebrations held across Canada by communities of various national, ethnic, and linguistic origins. He highlighted the two decades-plus annual celebration of Black History Month, recognized by the House in 1995 and by the Senate 13 years later. He explained that the designation of Black History Month has done much to educate and to familiarize Canadians with the stories and the history of an important demographic too often absent in our school curricula. He mentioned as well Asian Heritage Month, passed and proclaimed in 2002 and marked annually ever since, when non-Asian Canadians learn of and experience the sounds, entertainment, and tastes of Asia, and the contribution that Asian Canadians have brought to Canadian society.
Senator Enverga argued that those were just two wonderful examples of designated heritage months, to which he believed a Latin American heritage month should be added. He wanted to highlight the unique Latin American culture and the ever-changing landscapes, not only in Central and South America but also in the Caribbean, given the centuries of evolutions and revolutions and the many nuanced geopolitical sensitivities from the region's colourful history.
This legislation would essentially recognize the many significant contributions to Canada's social, economic, cultural, and political fabric made by Canada's dynamic Latin American community.
For the purpose of this bill, Senator Enverga anticipated the widest possible interpretation so that Bill S-218 could cover those whose identity is Spanish and Portuguese from South America and Central America, as well as those whose heritage is from the francophone and Hispanic Caribbean islands. Using that broad and very inclusive measure, we can see that Canadians of Latin American origin can be found far and wide across our great country from coast to coast to coast. In the absence of absolute census numbers covering that broad and somewhat imprecise measure, we might estimate a probable demographic well above half a million men, women, and children here in Canada.
What we know for certain is that the Latin American community is one of the fastest-growing cultural groups in Canada today. Statistics Canada reports that between 1996 and 2001 the number of individuals reporting Latin American origins rose by 32%, at a time when the overall Canadian population grew by only 4%. 
These numbers are particularly interesting given that there was only a very small Latin American population in Canada before the 1960s. It was in the 1960s and 1970s that Canada recorded the first significant migration of Latin Americans. Sadly, their motivation in too many cases was to escape social and economic turmoil, dictatorships, and conflict.
 Most recently, another wave is fleeing Venezuela's corrupt and repressive socialist regimes under first Hugo Chavez and now the brutal Nicolas Maduro. These Latin Americans represent a significant loss to the countries they have left, but they have been a welcome addition in Canada. Their education, their skills, and their adaptability have been a great benefit to Canada's labour market, to our economy, and to our culture.
Most Canadians of Latin American origin live in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, or Alberta, with almost half making their home in Ontario. Canada's Latin American population is also young. Statistics Canada tells us that almost 50% of those with Latin America origins living in Canada are under the age of 25. Seniors make up less than 5% of those reporting Latin American origins, compared with 12% of all other Canadians.
 Virtually all Canadians of Latin American origin are functional in one of Canada's two official languages. They are slightly more likely than the rest of our population to have university degrees. Statistics Canada also tells us that working-age adults of Latin American origins are somewhat more likely to be employed than the rest of Canada's adult population, fully 64% of adults of Latin American origin.
Latin America as a region is considered the fourth-largest source of immigration to Canada. However, in stark contrast to the United States, the demographic is not measured or appreciated nearly as much as its counterparts in the U.S.A. Senator Enverga's bill, Bill S-218, stands not only to deepen our appreciation and celebration of our Latin American community, but to precisely measure the actual numbers and its regional contributions to our economy.
[Member spoke in Spanish]
[English]
The Latino community in Alberta hosts an annual fiesta called “Fiestaval”. Fiestaval is a family-oriented, multicultural arts and entertainment festival, highlighting Latin American music, food, and culture. Two years ago, I attended the Fiestaval event when it was held in Red Deer. This year's Fiestaval will be held in Calgary from July 20 to 22, and it will take place in the heart of downtown Calgary at the Olympic Plaza.
The Latin culture is also close to me and my family. A four-hour flight from Calgary does take me to Ottawa, but a similar four-hour flight takes me to Mazatlan. It is the same time zone so it is much better that way. We have had opportunities over the years to bring our family to Mexico, so much so that my daughter Megan not only picked up a love of the culture but also the language. While at the University of Alberta, she volunteered at the Edmonton women's shelter for immigrant women and later spent five years teaching Spanish in Sylvan Lake.
When I came to Ottawa in 2008, I was honoured to be part of ParlAmericas. Through that organization, as well as Asia Pacific and participation in OAS meetings and various bilateral discussions, I was able to use my love of the Latin American culture to serve not just my community but our country as well. Panama, Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Colombia are but a few of the countries where Canadians have had a great influence, and this relationship with our nation is reflected here at home.
I recall specifically being in Colombia for bilateral talks at the same time that the discussions were taking place in Havana between Colombia and FARC and ELN. We had discussions with civil society representatives as they went back and forth to Havana. They said their children had been taken to terrorist camps, some had been killed, some had been raped, and all types of things had happened to them, but somewhere along the line they had to stop the 60 years of terrible things happening in their communities. They were able to deal with that. That is always going to stay with me.
I hope my colleagues will support this well-thought-out bill. Together, we can ensure that Senator Enverga's legacy and advocacy lives on every time we celebrate Latin American heritage month.
Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. I am pleased to be part of the one party in the House that is actually interested in talking about our relationship with Latin America. 
It seems only the Conservatives want to make the case for this bill, and for this important relationship. That is an interesting thing. I am sure that the community and Latin America really appreciates our party's contribution and engagement with this issue. Certainly this is something that we are going to continue to talk about. Conservatives believe in and value Canada's relationship with all of our partners around the world, and with the community in Latin America. I think that the case needs to be made on this bill and that is what those of us in the official opposition precisely are going to continue to do. 
I have a lot that I want to say on this bill. I am sorry that I only have 10 minutes but I will do my best to get through all of my points. I know my colleagues across the way are disappointed as well that I only have 10 minutes to make the case.
Of course this is the late Senator Enverga's bill and I think it is important to start out by saluting his good work in the Senate, and outside of the Senate as well. Unlike some of our longer tenured members, I did not have the same opportunity to get to know him so well, but in the short time in which our careers overlapped here on Parliament Hill, I saw his commitment to this place, his commitment to advocating for his community and country, and using the role he had as a senator to really move this country forward. This bill is one example of that larger contribution he made.
There are a few things that I wanted to comment on in this bill. Speaking of Latin American history and heritage, I wanted to share a bit about my own familial connection to Latin America. It is an important connection. Although no member of my family has Latin American origins, my grandparents met in Latin America. I am glad they did because I would not be here otherwise.
The story is a simple one. My grandfather was born here in Canada. He was born in Toronto. My grandmother was born in Europe. She was part Jewish. She was a Holocaust survivor. The family was able to get one visa so my great-grandfather left Germany. He went to South America, as I recall, without any sort of particular design. This was just where they were able to get a visa. He ended up in Ecuador. My grandmother survived the war inside Germany and then she and her mother left for South America to meet up with my great-grandfather. They met up in South America. My grandmother worked at a bookstore. My grandmother was a refugee and my grandfather who was a Canadian was the explorer. He kind of went out adventuring and travelled all over the world. I know he spent some time in the Philippines as well as a young man. That is another connection to Senator Enverga. He spent two years in the Philippines. He ended up as well in South America. 
Therefore, it was in Ecuador that my grandparents met at a house party. Three weeks later they were engaged and ended up back here in Canada. From my perspective, it is a great Canadian story of explorer meets refugee and they end up in Canada. However, South America was that crossover point where people from different parts of the world who were seeking opportunity came and were able to meet.
My mother was also born in South America. After returning to Canada, my grandparents went back and they spent some time in Venezuela. Of course, we are very familiar with the challenges in Venezuela, the abuse of human rights, the abuse of democracy, that we see from the Maduro regime there. It is interesting that it was not that long ago when Venezuela, rich in resources, was a place where a Canadian would go to seek work and opportunity.
That is a little bit of my own personal connection to South America as part of the region that is spoken about in this bill. We can see through that, and in general, the rich resources, rich culture, and rich opportunities that exist in that region. Certainly, there are many opportunities as a result of that, in terms of cultural enrichment and Canada's relationship with the region. I know, for example, that my colleague from B.C., a former trade minister in the Harper government, spoke about the trade deals that Canada signed and other trade deals that Canada was in the process of seeking during the period of the Harper government. We had an aggressive, vigorous trade agenda that was very successful and committed to deepening those ties throughout the world, but in particular we were successful at developing deeper ties in the Americas.
From time to time other parties did not agree with us on that trade agenda. They would say, for example, that we should not be trading with countries that do not have a perfect human rights record, yet we saw opportunities through trade, through engagement, but also through associated labour and environmental agreements, to create the opportunities and the catalyst for the kinds of improvements that were under way in those countries, indeed that people were seeking in those countries.
We saw trade as a part of a constructive tool kit for our engagement with these countries. Under the previous government, we had a minister of state who was responsible for the Americas. This reflected the particular emphasis we put on the economic, cultural, and strategic relationship we had with Latin America.
Part of the importance of that relationship, as well, was the role that Canada could play in championing our values, what we sometimes describe as Canadian values but also really are universal human values: the ideas of freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. In all of our relationships around the world, we seek to advance those values. In particular, in the previous government, in our engagement with Latin America, we saw opportunities and did work to advance those values.
Today we see certain countries where there are increasing challenges. I do not think enough has been said, for example, in Canada or in this House, about the situation in Nicaragua. We see many people being killed in protests that are taking place, people who are challenging the repression that is happening. Protestors are being killed. It is important for us to raise these issues, to ask questions, and to challenge the Government of Nicaragua to respect the fundamental rights of people in that country.
I am hopeful that this will be part of the engagement that our government takes around the world. They say that the advancement of human rights and protection of democracy is a key priority. We are skeptical in certain instances of the way that works itself out in practice. We have continued to challenge the government on those issues.
Nonetheless, another case I should mention is Venezuela. We have seen, in response to a lot of pressure that has come from civil society as well as the opposition, a downgrading in the diplomatic relationship with Venezuela, which was a way of sending a message. It is important, as well, that we use the tool kits that are available, such as Magnitsky sanctions against some of these regimes.
It is also striking to me, when I think about the challenges that exist in Latin America, in some of these countries, and ask the question, what does it take to engage our attention in some of these human rights issues? We speak about Latin American issues that are relatively very close to us. Many Canadians have connections and will go on vacation, perhaps, to countries in Central and South America, yet when there are challenges, whether it is natural disasters or human rights issues that emerge, I do not know if those engage the headlines here in the way that maybe we would like them to.
This is a challenge that we have to reflect on, how, in a spirit of universal human solidarity, we can try to make sure we are engaged, yes, of course, with the things that are in our immediate environment, but also to engage with questions of human well-being and suffering as they happen elsewhere.
In this context, I was going to read a quote from The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith, but I do not think I have time in the one minute I have left. Anyway, the point he makes in a fairly famous fable is that if we imagined some terrible tragedy happening on the other side of the world, we might reflect on it, we might consider it, we might engage it philosophically, and then we might, after that, kind of go on about our business.
However, if we were to imagine, in the case of the fable, losing one's own little finger tomorrow, or imagine some relatively very minor tragedy happening to ourselves, it would engage us at a visceral and a subconscious level. It is our reason and our sense of higher value that pushes us beyond this to feel a really strong sense of solidarity and fellowship with those around us.
Hon. Mike Lake: Madam Speaker, I have a point of order. I do not think any Liberal has spoken yet on this piece of legislation. There are a few of them still in the chamber, and I want to make sure that no one wants the opportunity—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): That is not a point of order, so I would just ask the member to start his speech if he wishes to do so.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Oh, oh!
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes):  Order. I have already made my statement on it. I do not think I need any help from the government side. I will certainly allow the member to start his speech. If anyone else wants to get up, they will be able to do so and be recognized.
The hon. member.
Mike Lake: Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that no Liberal wanted to get up to speak to this, but they have no hesitation in heckling us as we are speaking to this important bill.
We have been discussing the bill for several hours tonight, and those who are watching, and I am sure many people are riveted to the debate tonight, may have forgotten what we are talking about. I will read the bill as a way of reintroducing it to folks who may have tuned in late and who may not know what we are talking about.
It is Bill S-218, an act respecting Latin American heritage month, which was moved by Senator Enverga, who was a valued member of our Conservative team. He was a senator from 2012 until he passed away in 2017.
Senator Enverga was the first Filipino Canadian elected in the city of Toronto. He was a Catholic School Board trustee in Toronto, and he was known in the region for launching the Philippine Canadian Charitable Foundation. He was also co-chair of the Canada-Philippines Interparliamentary Group.
He inaugurated the annual Filipino independence day flag-raising on Parliament Hill, and he was a “tireless champion for multiculturalism” and was “an advocate for people with disabilities”, as pointed out in The Globe and Mail article, as his daughter Rocel has Down's syndrome, which is obviously something close to my heart as well, as people in the House know.
One of the things that strikes me about this legislation is the fact that even though Senator Enverga was a tireless champion for folks in the Filipino community, he decided to move a bill to propose a Latin American heritage month. That just speaks to who he was.
One of the things that I will remember about Senator Enverga is that whenever he walked into a room, the room got brighter because he was there. He was a shining light.
He was very passionate about Canada and about the work our Conservative government was doing. He was also very passionate about the opportunity he had as someone born in the Philippines who immigrated to Canada and who took his place as a senator in this country. We miss him in our caucus, and the Hill is diminished by not having him around.
I often think about my own community in Edmonton—Wetaskiwin. A lot of people looking at this riding on a map make the mistaken assumption that there is no diversity there. However, Wetaskiwin, which is a community of 17,000 people, actually has a significant Filipino population. When I am in Wetaskiwin, I think of folks like Senator Enverga, and I see this unbelievable passion within the Filipino community there.
Those members of Parliament who have a sizable Filipino community in their riding will recognize what it is like to get to a Filipino household when they are door-knocking. It is almost like there is a celebration because a member of Parliament is there. When members show up for events, the Filipino people have an incredible joy. Senator Enverga was the personification of that within our team and within the confines of Parliament Hill.
His bill, an act respecting Latin American heritage month, is pretty simple. It reads:
 Whereas the Parliament of Canada recognizes that members of the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic and political fabric of the nation; 
 Whereas the designation of a month as Latin American Heritage Month would be a meaningful way to remember, celebrate and educate the public about these contributions; 
 Whereas Latin American communities across Canada would be mobilized by a Latin American Heritage Month to jointly celebrate, share and promote their unique culture and traditions with all Canadians; 
 And whereas October is a significant month for the Latin American community around the world; 
 Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: 
 1 This Act may be cited as the Latin American Heritage Month Act. 
 2 Throughout Canada, in each and every year, the month of October is to be known as “Latin American Heritage Month”. 
It is very simple, and I hope members from all parties will support this bill.
I am really glad we have had the opportunity to discuss this tonight. Having listened to the debate tonight, it is probably one of the most productive evenings we have had in the House of Commons in the last several weeks. It is a nice break, because if we look at the things we have been discussing in the absence of legislation like this—
[Intervention]
An hon. member:  Closure and time allocation.
Mike Lake:  Yes, a lot of closure and time allocation debates, and then the time spent during the votes on those things. I think we had five in a three-day span last week. We have been discussing the $18-billion deficit that the government is running, despite the fact that it promised a balance budget by next year. We are talking about some pretty devastating stuff. 
The government has increased spending by $58 billion annually and cannot find a way to balance the budget. It had increased spending by over 21% in four years and our kids and grandkids are the ones who will pay the price for that down the road, just like in the days of the former Trudeau government of the 1970s. There were massive increases in spending and it was the generation in the mid-1990s that had to pay for a $35-billion cut in health care, social services, and education transfers to the provinces, which was when the bill came due. We are going in the same direction now. 
It is very encouraging to have the opportunity to talk about something other than the nationalization of pipelines, for example. At one point, there were four pipelines in the pipeline, so to speak, when the Liberal government was elected in 2015. Northern gateway was approved and energy east was well on its way. Trans Mountain was moving forward as well, and there was a lot of talk about Keystone XL.
 The Liberals managed to cancel northern gateway and completely changed the rules that made it impossible for energy east to move forward. The energy minister likes to say that the company made an economic business decision to cancel energy east, after it had spent $1 billion navigating a regulatory system, and the government changed the rules on it. Naturally, it made an economic decision not to go forward and not to waste another $1 billion. 
It is very encouraging to have the opportunity to talk about something tonight other than the Liberals' failed policy on pipelines, which has it now buying a pipeline for $4.5 billion because it cannot find a private sector company to move forward with it, when there used to be four projects on the go. It is very nice to have the opportunity to talk about something other than those things tonight.
 We could have been talking about the carbon tax. There has been a lot of discussion about the carbon tax. 
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would ask for the unanimous consent of the House to have the finance minister go before the finance committee of the House of Commons and tell Canadians what the carbon tax will cost Canadian families.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is not a point of order. The hon. member has less than a minute left if he would like to finish his speech.
Mike Lake: Madam Speaker, there is a lot of activity on the other side of the House right now. I imagine people are flooding in to have the opportunity to finally speak to this legislation.
With that, I will cede the floor, with the hope that, finally, a Liberal member will stand to speak to this important legislation.
John Nater: Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House at this relatively late hour to debate Bill S-218. 
Before I do, I want to make note of the hard-working people who allow this place to operate: the table officers, the pages, our Hansard reporters, Parliamentary Protective Service, food services, the bus drivers, and everyone who keeps this place going. They do an exceptional job, especially at this late hour. I would just point out that the Hansard officer today is a young man by the name of Sam, who is actually in the Arthur Kroeger College of Public Affairs, which is the same college I attended at Carleton University. He is an exceptional, hard-working young man. 
I would note that I am the 35th person to debate the bill tonight. I would note as well that those who have debated so far have been Conservatives, New Democrats, and even the Green Party. Unfortunately, those who serve as members of the government have not spoken to the bill. 
Bill S-218 was introduced in the other place by our dear friend, our late colleague, the hon. Senator Tobias Enverga. Certainly, on a night like this when we are debating his bill, we all wish he was here with us, that he could be sitting in the Senate gallery observing this important debate. However, we lost him all too soon at the age of 61. In fact, he was attending a meeting of the Canadian section of the ParlAmericas, travelling with the Canadian section to Colombia when he passed away so suddenly. Tonight our thoughts are with his family, his dear wife Rosemer and their three daughters. As we have heard, his daughters were truly his inspiration for a variety of different things, including his support of Canadians living with disabilities. One of his daughters lives with Down's syndrome and was always a support to him.
 As members will know, before being elected, Senator Enverga was a trustee in the Toronto Catholic District School Board. In fact, when he was elected to that position, he became the first Filipino Canadian elected within the city of Toronto. When he was appointed to the other place in 2012, it was the first time a Filipino Canadian had been appointed to the other place. In the 145 years, to that point, of Confederation, Senator Enverga became the first Filipino Canadian to be appointed to the Senate.
When I rise to debate the bill, an act respecting Latin American heritage month, I think of the many Canadians of Latin American descent who came to Canada to build a better life for themselves and for their families. I think of a good friend of mine, Sebastian Ortega. His parents, Julio and Carmen Ortega came from Peru to Canada in 1993. They are now proud to be living in Canada and their family is contributing to our great society. 
When the bill was introduced in the other place, Senator Enverga rose on March 8, 2016, to state:
 I came to Canada as an immigrant, and I am one of many in this chamber who have been fortunate to be welcomed here to contribute to our society. Few countries in the world are as open and accepting to people who come from other countries to settle and make a new life for themselves as our country is. The Canadian policy of multiculturalism is a great success when it comes to allowing for, and celebrating, the various cultural backgrounds and languages we have. 
I would echo those comments from the late senator. By passing Bill S-218 we are able to celebrate that great diversity. We are able to celebrate that history of multiculturalism that we see in this place, that we see across the country, and that we see in each of our ridings. 
According to Statistics Canada, in 2016 there were 674,640 Canadians living in Canada who are of Latin American descent. Indeed, in my own riding of Perth—Wellington, a strong rural community, there are 1,570 Canadians who are of Latin American descent. It is important that we recognize and celebrate this contribution to our great society.
There is precedent for a bill of this nature. The House and the other place have, in the 42nd Parliament, designated a variety of months or days for symbolic cultural purposes. The month of May was designated as Canadian Jewish Heritage Month. Motion No. 124 designated the month of January as Tamil Heritage Month. Motion No. 64 dedicated the month of June as Italian Heritage Month. Motion No. 73 dedicated the month of October as German Heritage Month. Coming from a riding with a strong German presence, we certainly appreciate that recognition. Motion No. 126 dedicated the month of June as Portuguese Heritage Month. On the Order Paper, as we speak, Bill C-317 would designate the month of October as Hispanic heritage month, and Bill C-376 would designate the month of April as Sikh heritage month.
I have minor concerns about some of these bills, and they are mathematical in nature. We only have 12 months in the year, and there is some duplication and overlap in months. That is a concern for some. For example, the bill we are debating here tonight would designate October as the said month for Latin American heritage month, which would fall in the same month as Oktoberfest and German Heritage Month. There is an overlap. It is not an insurmountable overlap or a significant concern that would delay the passage of the bill, but it is something we need to recognize, and ensure that we are cognizant of these points when we are debating this issue.
For example, we have already passed in this place the designation of the month of June both as Italian Heritage Month and as Portuguese Heritage Month. We can enjoy and celebrate both those important contributions by recognizing these days.
I would note that earlier tonight, the member for Huron—Bruce provided an exceptional overview of some of the contributions Latin American players have made to the great sport of baseball. In my riding of Perth—Wellington, we are home to the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, and the induction ceremony is this weekend. Madam Speaker, if you are free, we would welcome you at the induction ceremony, where they will be honouring Pedro Martinez, who was born in the Dominican Republic and will be inducted for his time with the Montreal Expos. I am looking forward to that celebration this Saturday, and I invite all members to join us on Saturday when we make that induction official.
I would like to conclude by saying how important I think it is to recognize the month of October as Latin American heritage month, and I would like to conclude with the words of Senator Enverga. He said, in the other place:
 Declaring the month of October as Latin American heritage month will be a wonderful opportunity for us to contribute to our collective story, a uniquely Canadian story increasingly filled with symbols of multiculturalism, a shared history that has led us to the society we now live in where our rights and freedoms are protected under the principles of peace, order and good government. 

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Thank you, and I appreciate the invite, but I believe there might be votes on Saturday, so the member may want to consider that as well.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.
Luc Berthold: Madam Speaker, we are very eager to hear a government member speak about Latin American heritage month. I am the 36th member to speak, and so far no one on the other side of the House has deigned to make a speech on the important bill introduced by a colleague of ours from the other place, Senator Tobias Enverga, who left us far too soon in November.
He sponsored this public bill, and he would surely have been proud to be here today to talk about it with us. I would like to remind the members that he first proposed this bill back in 2015, during the last Parliament. Sadly, there was not enough time to study it before the election was called. I think we can understand and appreciate that this bill was important to Senator Enverga. I am sure we will be able to pass this bill and add to his legacy here in Parliament.
To understand the motivation that led the senator to table Bill S-218, I would like to remind the House of two points from its preamble:
 Whereas the Parliament of Canada recognizes that members of the Latin American community in Canada have made significant contributions to the social, economic and political fabric of the nation; 
 Whereas the designation of a month as Latin American Heritage Month would be a meaningful way to remember, celebrate and educate the public about these contributions; 
With that in mind, I believe that, as Canadians, we can all be proud of our history and common heritage. What unites us is the heritage of each culture, the blending of languages, customs, practices, and places, or in other words, the elements that help to identify us as Canadians today.
Just as our history allowed for the meaningful blending of cultures and languages among the French, the British, and the first nations, in most cases, the history of South American countries allowed South Americans to intentionally choose to join us in Canada. However, they often did so out of necessity.
For example, in 1973, following the coups in Chile and Uruguay, Canada implemented a program to welcome Latin American refugees fleeing the wars and dictatorships. This wave of refugees mainly included people from Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, and Central America, more specifically, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador.
In 1991 and 2011, a large number of people from Colombia, Guatemala, and El Salvador immigrated to Canada as refugees for humanitarian reasons because of the high level of civil insecurity in their countries. Most Latin Americans from other countries who settled in Quebec during that period came for a variety of reasons, namely cyclical economic crises, the transfer of labour from south to north, and family reunification.
I will talk about some of the opportunities Canada has given these individuals, who came here fleeing difficult situations in their own countries. I will talk about the Conservative candidate in the riding of Compton—Stanstead in the 2015 election, Gustavo Labrador, who is a close friend of mine.
In 1995, he landed in Montreal with his wife and her son, who was five years old at the time. Desperate for peace and prosperity, Gustavo quickly realized that he did not like Quebec's big cities, which is why he decided to settle in Sherbrooke. He adopted two little Chinese girls, and his son-in-law has had the pleasure of making a grandfather out of him.
 He learned French at the Centre Saint-Michel and studied at the Collégial du Séminaire de Sherbrooke. He found work at the Sûreté du Québec central dispatch answering 911 calls.
Why did he decide to seek political office? Here is his answer, quoted from a blog by Studio Jean Malo in Sherbrooke: 
 The Conservative Party's values have resonated with me for a very long time now. I am a great believer in individual responsibility, in a government that does not interfere in people's personal lives and that keeps its purse strings tight. I also believe in a government that supports families. Our children are the future of this nation. I come from a country, Venezuela, where there is a lot of insecurity. We have security here.... We need to make sure that those whom we welcome here will not jeopardize the safely and security of Canadians. 
In short, Gustavo came here and decided to actively participate in our society. He is very active in his community and took part in the electoral process. He is not here today, but that is not the point of our discussion or my presentation. This individual fled his own country and the difficult situation there, and had a chance to achieve his dreams and raise his family here.
On behalf of all my colleagues in the House of Commons, I want to applaud Gustavo and all the other Latin Americans who decided to go into politics, represent their fellow citizens, and serve their country.
In Canada, almost 450,000 people are from Latin American countries such as Mexico, Peru, Brazil and Cuba. They live right across the country, mainly in large cities such as Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, and Ottawa. World statistics are even more astounding. There are 447 million Hispanic people. They are so omnipresent, that we have even integrated their language into ours. I could invite everyone to a fiesta on my patio where we would all eat tacos and guacamole. That is now part of our own culture. These people brought with them their culture and we are very pleased to share it.
My riding of Mégantic—L'Érable has a small Latin American population. According to the most recent census, there were 175 people whose mother tongue was Spanish. It is very difficult to distinguish between people of Latin American origin and Hispanics who come from other countries because we do not have access to that data. However, today we can say that 175 people whose mother tongue is Spanish live in my riding.
I am pleased to see a member on the other side of the House getting ready to rise. I did a little census and could not understand why, after 36 speeches, not one member from the other side of the House had spoken even though there are many constituents in several Liberal ridings whose mother tongue is Spanish. For example, in the riding of Alfred-Pellan, there are 3,865; in Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, 220; in Bourassa, 6,375; in Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, 3,615; in Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine, 65; in Hull—Aylmer, 2,415; in Honoré-Mercier, the government whip's riding, 4,720; in Laurentides—Labelle, 405; in Louis-Hébert, 1,980; and in Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, 2,800. 
This shows that native Spanish speakers are present in large numbers in every riding in Canada. That is why we on this side of the House wonder why no government member has bothered making a speech on this important bill, which is going to help even more people understand Latin American culture and finally recognize the contributions Latin Americans have made to Canada and its communities.
Having spoken with farmers in my riding, I know they still desperately need people from those countries who are interested in coming to work in Canada. The door is open for people like that. My riding has plenty of jobs to offer them, and since we already have a well-established Latin American community, we can safely say that they can expect a warm welcome. We would gladly accommodate anyone who has gone through the regular immigration process and find them a job. Quebeckers and Latin Americans have the same Latin blood running through their veins. I think that is a fact worth mentioning.
Establishing Latin American heritage month is something very important that all hon. members of the House can achieve together. I hope that all hon. members will vote enthusiastically and unanimously in favour of Bill S-218.
Alexandra Mendes: Madam Speaker, I want to begin by commending my Latino brothers from Brazil and what I share with them. I am not of Latin American origin, but of Portuguese origin. I would also like to remind the House that on the government side, we all support this bill. We would be happy to see it return to the Senate to become law as soon as possible.
However, I would also like to remind the House that during the first hour of debate, my colleague from Honoré-Mercier delivered a very passionate speech with all his heart. He himself is Latin American and he explained why he believed that this bill deserved our full support. I think that on our side, we do not have much to add to what our colleague from Honoré-Mercier already said.
I represent a riding where there are roughly 5,000 people of Latin American origin. Over the years they moved to Brossard—Saint-Lambert and they have brought a lot to our community. I could take the same approach as my colleagues and start naming them all, but I doubt that I would have enough time to name all those who deserve to be recognized by their fellow Canadians.
I think all these months that we recognize in the House and designate as specific heritage months are extremely important to their respective communities because they celebrate our contributions to Canada. This is not just about what we receive, though we receive so much; it is also about our tremendous cultural contributions, which go well beyond food, dancing, and music. Culture also encompasses our values, our cultural wealth. The passage of time has made us who we are, has made us the peoples we are. That centuries-long past is what led us to choose immigration.
It is not always an easy path. I am not just talking about those who are driven to exile. I am talking about those who choose immigration, often, but not always, for economic reasons.
The choice to immigrate comes from a place of wanting to do better in life as well as from a desire to share and discover new horizons. I think the Latin American community is an extraordinary example of that. Not only did these people come here seeking a better life for themselves and their families, but also, they came to share a new perspective on life, a more relaxed, less rigid way of managing our time, for example. That is something I certainly believe in. They inspire us to really enjoy time with friends and family, to enjoy a less structured, less North American life. Those are the kinds of cultural features we share to create a friendlier, more easy-going culture. 
We bring all these things with us when we immigrate, and they mean so much. That is why it is important to designate months to celebrate the heritage of Canada's various communities.
I am obviously very proud of the fact that, this month, in fact today, we are celebrating the first Portuguese heritage month on the Hill. We celebrated Italian heritage month and there are months when Jewish heritage is celebrated. We have a tremendous number of things to share and to give to our constituents.
The richness and diversity of what makes us such a dynamic and vibrant country often surprises those who visit Canada. I think that the one thing that really surprises tourists is how we have achieved diversity in harmony and succeeded in integrating it as part of our core Canadian values, such as freedom, justice, and order, and also the values of friendliness, sociability, and solidarity.
These are all elements that we should celebrate when we have months to highlight the heritage of each of our communities. I believe that much has already been said of the very important contribution of the Latin American community. Passing this bill is not really something we would think of opposing. It is quite natural that we want to completely support the memory of the senator, and we also believe that diversity enriches Canada. As our Prime Minister said, we are enriched by our diversity and we celebrate it. I believe that that is something the Liberal Party of Canada will always support. None of my caucus colleagues would even think of doubting the value of what it can contribute.
We have already covered a few months on the calendar, and there are a few left to celebrate all the other cultures that have helped make Canadian such a vibrant patchwork, with all of its cultures, influences, and characteristics. I am very pleased to support this bill and to finalize it so that it can be sent back to the Senate for royal assent as quickly as possible, so that we will be able to celebrate Latin American heritage month this October 2018. 
I think that the entire Latin American community will be very happy and pleased that we are recognizing this community, and it will also be very proud of its rich culture. This culture includes not only the most recent aspects of Latin culture, but also all of the indigenous cultures that inspired present-day Latin American cultures.
Once again, I want to reiterate the support of government members for this bill. We will be very happy to see it sent back to the Senate as quickly as possible. I thank the House for finally giving me the opportunity to speak. I hope that we will be ready to vote very soon.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It being 11:30 p.m., the time provided for debate has expired. 
The question is on Motion No. 1. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt Motion No. 1?
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Agreed.
 No.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes):  All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Yea.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes):  All those opposed will please say nay.
[Intervention]
Some hon. members:  Nay.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes):  In my opinion the nays have it.
 And five or more members having risen: 
 Pursuant to order made Tuesday, May 29, the deferred recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, June 20, at the expiry of the time provided for oral questions.

Government Orders
Cannabis Act[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of the motion in relation to the amendments made by the Senate to Bill C-45, an act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other acts.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway had two minutes for questions and comments remaining.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Langley—Aldergrove.
Mark Warawa: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member what he thinks about the growing of marijuana in residences. The Senate has recommended that it would be up to the provinces to decide whether it would be legal to grow recreational marijuana, four plants which is actually 12 plants. Would the member agree with the recommendation of the Senate that it would be up to the provinces?
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, there are a couple of factual points I would like to make. 
First of all, the legislation says that it would allow Canadians to grow up to four plants per household. The member made a reference to 12 plants; I am not sure where that comes from.
Yes, we on this side of the House do believe that is a reasonable and proper provision of this bill. It was the task force on cannabis legalization headed by Anne McLellan that did an exhaustive examination of this issue, and decided to recommend that Canadians should be able to grow four plants. As the member may know, under the Supreme Court of Canada's decision, Canadians have the constitutional right to grow medicinal cannabis. It would seem quite perverse if the people in one house on a block could grow cannabis legally because they are growing it for medicinal use, and in the house beside it the people were not able to grow it simply because of the different purpose.
I also would point out that every single jurisdiction in the United States, Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and California, this year, all permit the growing of marijuana in reasonable limits and with reasonable parameters around it. If we want to have legalization of cannabis in this country, we have to trust Canadians to be able to responsibly use cannabis and to grow plants like any other plant, as long as it is done responsibly and in a reasonable amount.
Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with my colleague and hon. member for Vancouver Quadra. 
Before I give the formal part of my speech, I would like to start by discussing an element that was brought up by the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway, who had spoken about a number of members of the Senate and others as well as the Right Hon. John Turner as to their potential financial interest in legalizing marijuana. 
I understand this is an issue of privilege, that members can say what pleases them in this House. However, I found it particularly unparliamentary that the member would raise the record of someone who has served this country with distinction and with honour in talking about the Right Hon. John Turner who was Prime Minister of Canada, and among the positions he occupied he also was the minister of finance and the minister of justice. He is a man of some advanced age, I believe. I would like to wish him a happy birthday; he turned 89 quite recently. I know it on good authority that he has zero interest in the legalization of marijuana or any pecuniary derivative thereof. 
I will not presume bad faith on the side of the hon. member, and I hope that when he gets a chance to retract those words he does so because we are in fact talking about a person who served this country honourably, regardless of party lines. I do hope the member takes the chance to retract those comments.
I am pleased to rise in the House today to respond to an amendment adopted by the Senate with regard to Bill C-45, an act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other acts.
I commend the Senate for the valuable work that it did as part of its in-depth study of Bill C-45. However, I believe that some of the amendments the Senate adopted do not fully support the political objectives of the bill. They may also have unintended consequences.
Take for example, clause 5.2, a new clause that would provide for the following:
 For greater certainty, this Act does not affect the operation of any provision of provincial legislation that is more restrictive with respect to, or prohibits, the cultivation, propagation or harvesting of cannabis in a dwelling-house. 
Bill C-45 would allow adults to grow up to four cannabis plants per residence. Cannabis grown in a dwelling-house could not, under any circumstances, be sold to others, and anyone who grows more than four plants could be criminally charged. 
The justification for the proposal to allow Canadians to grow up to four cannabis plants per household is twofold. First, this proposal would help displace the illegal cannabis market. Second, it would help prevent the unnecessary criminalization of otherwise law-abiding Canadians who safely and responsibly grow a small number of cannabis plants at home for personal use.
Home cultivation would also create a legal source of cannabis for people who do not have easy access to it through a provincial or territorial store or an online platform, particularly those who live in remote regions.
The proposal to allow people to grow a limited quantity of cannabis for personal use is similar to the current provisions regarding tobacco and alcohol. Canadians can legally grow their own tobacco or brew their own beer at home for personal use.
We can also trust Canadians to properly store cannabis, just as they safely store their prescription drugs at home in a responsible manner.
 I would also like to point out that in the national cannabis survey, one of the questions the government asked was where people currently get their cannabis and where they thought they might be able to access it in the future. Of all the respondents who use cannabis, only 2% had thought of cultivating it for personal use. 
The home cultivation our government is proposing is based on the opinion of the task force on cannabis legalization and regulation, and is in line with the frameworks adopted by most of the American states that have chosen to legalize and regulate cannabis for non-medical purposes, particularly Colorado, California, Oregon, Nevada and Alaska.
Those states allow home cultivation and have limits regarding the number of plants that can be grown, ranging from four to 12 plants per household. It is important to remember that Bill C-45 was designed to allow the provinces and territories to oversee the distribution and sale of cannabis within their borders and to add additional restrictions regarding certain aspects that are not proposed in the federal cannabis legislation, such as personal cultivation, if they wish. 
That flexibility is there so they can adapt their laws in response to local realities and priorities in a way that is compatible with the public health and public safety goals in the proposed cannabis legislation.
 The Government of Canada believes that the provinces and territories are in the best position to determine whether they need such restrictions and to establish tougher regulations. Most of the provinces do allow home cultivation of four plants as set out in Bill C-45. However, some provinces have already chosen to include restrictions in their legislation. For example, New Brunswick requires cannabis cultivated outdoors to be surrounded by a locked enclosure. Indoor cultivation must take place in a separate, locked space. Alberta would allow indoor cultivation only, and Nova Scotia has indicated that it would allow landlords to prohibit cannabis cultivation and smoking in rental units. 
If someone decided to challenge a provision of a provincial cannabis law, a court would review the provincial system in its entirety, along with the federal cannabis law. It would then be up to the court to determine whether there was a conflict or whether the objectives of the federal legislation had been frustrated. 
Over the past two years, our government has carried out extensive consultations and studies to support this bill. In this way, we have developed the best possible measures for protecting all Canadians, especially young Canadians. 
Bill C-45 is largely based on the recommendations of the task force I mentioned earlier, which were formulated based on the opinions and expertise gathered through the extensive consultations. The bill reflects and balances the broad array of opinions from the provinces and territories, municipalities, communities, indigenous governments, and a wide range of experts and stakeholders.
The provincial and territorial governments developed their own legislation based on this insightful framework, and their investments and preparations for the establishment of retail systems are well under way. 
Bill C-45 proposes to allow adults to grow up to four cannabis plants at home. It is essential to allow home cultivation in order to support the government's objective of displacing the illegal market. 
The government is proposing a national approach to home cultivation designed to allow this activity to be achieved in a way that takes into account the valuable comments received from countless stakeholders. Although the framework for legalization includes some flexibility for setting certain restrictions on home cultivation, we are of the opinion that this amendment is inconsistent with that approach.
However, as we know, the bill contains a provision to review the cannabis act. Under that provision, three years after the coming into force, the minister will have to ensure that the act and its application are reviewed. Our government is proposing to amend that provision in order to specify that the review in question will include a review of the impacts of the cultivation of cannabis plants in a dwelling-house. Our government is committed to carefully examining the findings of such a review.
Based on the evidence currently before us, we are fully convinced that home cultivation can be done in such a way that is compatible with the health and public safety objectives of the bill. It constitutes a reasonable way to allow adults to grow cannabis for personal use, and that approach squares with the opinion of the task force and the approach adopted by most of the American states that have legalized and regulated cannabis. 
For those reasons, I will not be supporting this amendment.
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC): Madam Speaker, my colleague from Surrey explained to me where the 12 comes from. People are allowed to have four mature plants, four immature plants, and four plants that are just being planted.
If somebody with a prescription for marijuana is growing four plants, and someone else in the household does not have a prescription, does that mean they are allowed eight plants, which is really 24 plants? People are not supposed to share prescriptions with other people. If there is another person in the house with a different prescription for medical marijuana, would that person be allowed four plants, which is really 12, and then there would be 36 in the house?
I just want to know how this is going to work. I think that multiplication is even right with Liberal gun registry math.
Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, far be it from me to give anyone math instructions, but the member should well know that prescriptions are given on an individual basis and are not to be passed off. She should also know that on a medical basis, up to 30 grams are authorized.
Don Davies: Madam Speaker, I want to read into the record exactly what I said earlier that seemed to have offended the member's feelings. 
I said, “An emerging group...of cannabis capitalists...composed of the same police officers and government officials who have spent years prosecuting the war on drugs, has already begun staking its claim to the new recreational market.” 
 “Some prominent names include: Kim Derry, who served as the deputy chief when the current Liberal member for Scarborough Southwest... was Toronto police chief. He is now the security adviser for THC Meds Ontario. Former Ontario Liberal deputy premier, George Smitherman, who once served as the province's health minister“ is also tied to the the same company. “Former Liberal Prime Minister John Turner is a board member for Muileboom Organics, Inc, Chuck Rifici founded Tweed Cannabis Inc., the country's first licensed provider to go public while he was chief financial officer of the Liberal Party of Canada....Julian Fantino, who once compared cannabis to murder and voted in favour of harsh mandatory minimum sentences for cannabis as a member of the Harper cabinet, has now gone into the cannabis business.” 
“It is a travesty of justice and hypocrisy of the highest order that those who fought hardest for legalization may benefit the least from it, while those who spent a lifetime enforcing prohibition are now lining up to fill the boardrooms of the cannabis industry.”
I would like my hon. colleague to answer this. What was wrong with any of that? What is inaccurate? Why did John Turner, when he was prime minister, not legalize cannabis if he now thinks that he should be on the board of directors of a company and profit from it?
Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that he is speaking about a former prime minister, the Right hon. John Turner, who served this country honourably and in a very distinguished fashion. I see absolutely no remorse on the member's part, so I feel no particular compulsion or need to answer any further questions, which are quite leading.
 I would encourage the member to examine his conscience a little more in-depth and show a little remorse and respect for the House, and respect for a former distinguished prime minister, and distinguished cabinet minister, both in finance and justice. The member should take a little time and think about what he just said.
Karen Vecchio: Madam Speaker, we have heard what the Liberal government was going to do regarding education. However, as a mother, I have received nothing, and I do not believe any other parent have received anything. Where is this education that the government promised six months ago?
Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, if the member opposite examines the fiscal framework that we have been discussing with the provinces, she will note that we will be taking none of profits for personal use but investing it into fighting a lot of the ills that the consumption of cannabis has caused, including ensuring that youth know about the ills of consuming cannabis, particularly the effect on the immature brain.
 We will be giving 75% to provinces and municipalities to ensure that they address the issue, because they are in a good position to address it, and that they put it through their streams to ensure youth, in particular, know of the ills of consuming cannabis. 
Hon. Bardish Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism, Lib.):  Madam Speaker, I would like to advise that an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Orders 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the consideration of Bill C-45, An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts. Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the crown will propose, at the next sitting, a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.
David Anderson: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I am sorry to interrupt the proceedings, but the end of the member's intervention was cut off by translation, and we did not hear the last 30 seconds of it.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Apparently, there was a problem with translation. I would ask the government House leader to reread the notice of time allocation.
Bardish Chagger: I will read it into the record in English, Madam Speaker. 
I would like to advise that an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Orders 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the consideration of certain amendments to Bill C-45, an act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other acts. 
Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.
[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of the motion in relation to the amendments made by the Senate to Bill C-45, an act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other acts.
Ms. Joyce Murray (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I rise to speak to the message from the other place on Bill C-45. Before I start my remarks on that, I want to say that this is a historic time. I am very proud of this legislation, this change in social policy that we are making as a government.
 If we reflect on what it is like to go out for dinner with friends and have a beer or a glass of wine with dinner, and we think about the fact that there was a time when that was illegal, when the provision of alcohol was controlled by the criminal underworld, and when the act of partaking in alcohol was a crime, it is almost impossible to imagine that this made sense in an earlier period, and it certainly does not make sense to us today. In the same way, in the future we will be looking back at a time when cannabis was illegal, criminalized, and purveyed by criminal gangs. In a future day, the public in Canada will not be able to imagine how that could have made sense. In fact, it does not make sense. That is why I am so proud of what we are doing today. 
 It does not make sense because it has not worked. Having the use of cannabis deemed a criminal matter, as opposed to a health and safety matter, makes no sense. It creates massive profits for the Hells Angels and other organized criminals. It provides no safety with respect to what might be in the content of the product that is being consumed or what might be harmful. Members should make no mistake: It is being consumed, notwithstanding the fact that it is an illegal activity, a criminalized activity. Our young people are using this product at higher rates than virtually anywhere in the world. Therefore, it is far past time to take the control and regulation out of the hands of the criminal underworld, which has been profiting from it, and place them in the hands of government, where health and safety aspects can actually be addressed by the government. 
That is exactly why, in 2011, after the election, I began this discussion in Ottawa with Liberal colleagues, saying that I think it is time we address the situation and, as a party, consider legalizing marijuana. I had the privilege of bringing a film called The Union, a documentary about the control of cannabis by the criminal underworld and all the negative aspects of that for our society: the shootouts in open streets in broad daylight in our cities when there were gang wars; the drawing into criminal activity of young people, who were being recruited by the gangs to be part of their distribution network; and the hundreds of thousands of young Canadians who ended up in the justice system because of their involvement with cannabis.
Therefore, it is with great pride and humility that I want to acknowledge Parliament and the government for what we are doing here. This is a historic time. I have to say that in 2011 it looked pretty impossible. However, our Prime Minister took the bull by the horns and made this commitment in our last election platform, and we have proceeded with this project.
I am now going to talk about some of the details of implementation so that we do this as best as we possibly can as a Parliament and a government.
As others have already pointed out, both houses of Parliament have conducted extensive studies of the proposed cannabis act. In the other place, Bill C-45 was studied by five different committees, which heard from over 200 experts and witnesses. Four of those committees conducted an in-depth study of specific aspects of the legislation and its implications. They carefully assessed issues related to criminal law provisions, indigenous persons, international obligations, and Canada's borders. I want to add my voice to those who have acknowledged this important contribution, and to thank the other place for its extensive work on this bill.
The study of this proposed legislation by Parliament built on extensive work by the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation. In 2016, after the previous election, the task force undertook extensive consultations to hear from Canadians; public health experts; law enforcement; provincial, territorial, and municipal governments; indigenous organizations; U.S. state governments with more experience administering cannabis regimes; and more.
The proposed act was developed largely on the basis of the thoughtful advice of this task force, and the act has been carefully designed to support the policy objectives stated in clause 7. It was carefully designed to ensure that its provisions would comply with privacy and other obligations and respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
For these reasons, the amendments proposed by the other place had to be very carefully reviewed and assessed on the basis of whether they would support the bill's policy objectives and could have unintended consequences. Based on this review, it is clear that some amendments, in fact the majority of the amendments brought forward,would further improve the bill, and they support its objectives. Others are problematic.
For example, the amendment that would further clarify the requirements and the scope of the legislative review that would be undertaken three years after the coming into force of the act would be a positive improvement to the legislation. This amendment would establish a clear timeline of 18 months, following the beginning of the review, for the minister to table in Parliament a report on the findings of the review.
In line with the objective of a separate amendment in the other place, it is proposed that the act clearly indicate that this legislative review carefully consider the impacts of this legislation on public health, including on youth, the impacts on indigenous peoples, and the impacts of home cultivation.
However, on the other hand, a number of amendments adopted in the other place cannot be supported, as they could create significant issues. This is the case, for example, of an amendment that would require that the minister collect and publicly disclose the names of every holder of a licence or permit, including persons who have control of or shares in corporations holding a licence. This amendment would raise concerns from a privacy perspective and would impose requirements on businesses operating in the legal cannabis industry that would be inconsistent with how businesses operating in other Canadian industries are treated.
It would also pose some issues from an operational perspective. For example, the volatility of shareholding in a publicly traded corporation could make the proposed reporting requirements practically impossible to meet and could cause extreme delays in licensing.
Health Canada has a robust physical and personnel security screening process in place for the existing cannabis for medical purposes industry. It is designed to guard against infiltration by organized crime. All officers and directors of a company must undergo thorough law enforcement record checks prior to licensing.
As part of the new regulatory framework, Health Canada has proposed to expand the list of individuals who would require a security clearance to include the directors and officers of any controlling company, in addition to those of the licensed company.
As we finalize our study of Bill C-45, I urge all parliamentarians to remember that this legislative framework is one of the pillars of a comprehensive public health approach the government is proposing to better protect Canadians and minimize the harms associated with cannabis use.
The government is taking action in a number of key areas, informed by the strict regulatory controls that are currently in place for Canadians who access cannabis for medical purposes and by lessons learned from our considerable success in taking a public health approach to reducing tobacco smoking rates. Our strategies include efforts to educate Canadians about the harms and risks of cannabis use, to promote healthy choices and reduce youth access, and to prevent problematic and high risk patterns of use, and many more.
It is important that we consider the proposed legislation in the context of these broader proven strategies for protecting public health. The government has taken every reasonable action to ensure that this bill is designed to take those things into account. I am proud of Bill C-45 and proud to—